![]() For example, aircraft accounted for around 1% of UK exports in the early 1960s and over 4% in 2018 the share of power generating machinery in exports was around 4% in the earlier period, rising to over 7% in 2018. Again, not only does the value of trade rise, but the expansion of exports leads to increased specialisation. Opening up to trade also enables firms to sell to new buyers and markets. (d) they may simply be ‘different’ from those produced domestically.Ĭonsumers and firms who are now able to buy (cheaper) imported goods are obvious winners from trade: imagine being restricted to drinking only Welsh Claret! But increasing imports brings competitive pressures which may also result in domestic industries and sectors declining, and losing out from trade. (a) these goods may not be available from domestic sources, Why do we buy these imported goods as opposed to those produced domestically? In 1965, for example, motor vehicles accounted for 1% of total UK goods imports, and by 2018 they accounted for over 11% similarly, medicines and pharmaceutical products accounted for less than 0.2% of imports in 1965, and nearly 5% in 2018 and the import share for clothing grew from less than 1% to over 4%. Not only does the value of imports rise, the increase in trade is typically accompanied by more specialisation. trade liberalisation) allows a country, and the consumers and firms in that country, to buy more goods from more countries. In this section we consider what drives international trade and why trade may have such distributional consequences. Most economic changes produce winners and losers, and this is also true for changes in trade. ![]() We then summarise the empirical evidence on these mechanisms and discuss potential policy responses. We first provide a conceptual background which outlines the causal mechanisms which may lead to winners and losers. Our focus is primarily on developed countries, and on within-country impacts rather than cross-country effects. The aim of this Briefing Paper is, therefore, to sketch out how trade changes may result in ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ – be these consumers, workers, regions, or industries. Given such developments, and as the UK prepares to leave the EU and have an independent trade policy, it is important to understand how future trade agreements, or policy changes, may affect economic outcomes such as prices, productivity and output, and through these, individuals and regions. Those concerns, in turn, are seen as being partly responsible for the rise in populism in some developed countries. Indeed, within a broader context of rising inequality in many countries, recent years have seen growing public concern surrounding the negative consequences of trade and globalisation for certain sectors of society. However, increasing trade is likely to create losers as well as winners. Watch: Briefing Paper Launch and Panel DiscussionĮconomists have long argued, and with good justification, that international trade brings overall benefits to economies. Winners and Losers: What is the Evidence? Why is Trade a ‘Good Thing’…But Not Necessarily For All? ![]() ![]() Michael Gasiorek, Julia Magntorn Garrett and Ilona Serwicka Download Briefing Paper 33 Briefing Paper 33 – July 2019
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |