1、 外文翻译 原文 Capabilities， Wealth and the Export-Mix Material Source: Eocn 365 International Trade workshop Author： John Sutton Daniel leifler What is the relationship between a countrys mix of exports， and the countrys wealth? Or， if we consider some particular product， what determines the set of count
2、ries for which it is a relatively important export? Questions of this kind have attracted ongoing attention in the literature from Michaely(1984)， to Lall， Weiss, and Zhang(2006),and Hausmann,Hwang,and Rodrik(2007).(See also Chenery(1960)and Leamer(1984)on ladders of development more generally.)Thes
3、e authors proceed by examining the average gdp per cap of(major)exporters of each good.The point of departure of the present paper lies in the observation that the range of countries producing any specific good， in terms of countries gdp per capita， is usually very wide.This has been documented by S
4、choot(2004， 2008) and Khandelwal(for the coming ).This can be seen as reflecting two contributory effects.The first isaggregation:i.e.it merely reflects an overly broad definition of agoodor anindustry. The second is that different producers across this range differ inquality.We argue that the latte
5、r contribution is substantial and possibly dominantand so we set out to examine how this range of producers emerges endogenously within aQuality Competitionmodel. Such models form the basis of the recent literature on Quality and Trade， which emphasizes the role of productivity and quality(in whatev
6、er basket of goods the country produces)as the driver of cross-country differences in gdp per capita.One aim of the present paper is to show how a countrys capabilities i.e.， its productivity and quality levels in each good， simultaneously determines both the mix of goods it produces and exports， an
7、d its level of gdp per capita. In the recent literature on Quality and Trade ， it is widely assumed that higher quality is monotonically related to(positively correlated with)higher markups and higher market shares.This is indeed a prediction of partial equilibrium models in which producers with dif
8、ferent quality levels face a common wage level in their single domestic market.We show， however， that in a multi-product General Equilibrium trade setting， this is no longer true. If we consider a range of exporters，ranked in increasing order of gdp per capita， then countries at the top of the range
9、 offer the highest qualities， but they also have the highest wage rates， deriving from the demand for their domestic labour from firms operating in other， more sophisticated industries.Their higher quality is accompanied， therefore， by a higher marginal cost.A country at the top end of the range fac
10、es opportunity costs in terms of the use of domestic labour in the production of higher-ranking goods:a country can betoo richi.e.have too high wages， to warrant its participation in a market.By the same token， a country can， as it moves upwards in terms of the quality levels it can achieve across a
11、ll markets， find its quality and markup rising in a given market，but its market share declining， as more of its firms and workers migrate to other，more sophisticated industries.The Apple company could doubtless make colour TVs of outstanding quality and command high markups;but its efforts yield a g
12、reater return in more sophisticated products. What emerges from this is that the relation between quality and market share in a general equilibrium trade setting is non-monotonic;the form of the relation will depend on standard Ricardian comparative advantage considerations.This non-monotonic relati
13、on is what drives the appearance of a range of countries， ranked by gdp per capita， that produce each good at equilibrium. Once we have established this range， and have identified it with quality differences， we note that a country can become rich in two ways:either by improving its quality and/or p
14、roductivity in its existing goods， or by moving to more sophisticated goods.The above-cited authors have emphasized thechanging mixcontribution.We show in what follows that improvements in the product mix systematically under-predict rises in gdp per cap， for low-income countries over the past 25 ye
15、ars.We interpret this as showing that these countries typically enter new markets at thelow qualityend of the range.(We acknowledge that， in some cases，this can be interpreted as moving into a relatively undemanding sub-market within the larger market.) The driving assumption of the present model is
16、 that， if we rank products in order of the capabilities their production requires， then the number of countries capable of producing a product to a given relative quality level falls as we move up to higher ranked products.This notion ofscarce capabilities(Sutton， 2001)4 is motivated by a central id
17、ea in the modernmarket structureliterature:if firms must incur fixed and sunk outlays to develop their capabilities， then the number of firms that find it profitable to develop these capabilities will be limited:the greater the elasticity of response of quality(or productivity)to Rfor a general equi
18、librium analysis of the mechanism of entry and Rand the trajectory followed by this group of countries suggests that the key challenges to development may be more on the traditional emphasis on improving quality and productivity within existing activities. The aim of this paper has been to explore t
19、he way in which advances in wealth are associated both with changes in the product mix and with changes in quality and productivity within a given set of industries.The central point relates to the fact that the range wealth levels of significant exporters of most goods， defined at the conventional
20、6-digit level， is very wide， and that moving to more disaggregated data does not， in the case of most industries change or improve this.At a theoretical level ， one reason for the wide range lies in aggregation of disparate sub-industries;another lies in the fact that within any industry， there will
21、， in a general equilibrium multi country setting， be a viable range of producer wealth levels. The central property of this producer-wealth range is that， in a multi market general equilibrium setting， the relation between quality and price on the one hand，and output ， sales revenue and global marke
22、t share on the other ， is non-monotonic.There is at equilibrium a range of producer capabilities(and so wealth)levels that are viable in a given industry. As capability rises， the country moves into the production of higher ranked goods， and its equilibrium wage(or gdp per capita)rises.But this mean
23、s that its output， sales revenue and global market share exhibits an inverted-U relationship with capability， and so with gdp per capita.As capability rises， market share rises， and wages rise also.As the country advances into the production of higher ranked products， the rise in wage causes its eff
24、ective cost level to rise， and its global market share in this industry to fall.It is this inverted U relation that is the basis of the selection effect that links a countrys wealth to its product-mix. 译文 能力，财富和出口商品结构 资料来源 : Eocn 365 International Trade workshop 作 者： 约翰萨顿 丹尼尔莱夫勒 一个国家的经济实力与其出口商品结构有何关
25、系 ？ 或者说，如果我们将一些商品指定为特殊的出口商品，那么是什么决定他们能够成为相对比较重要的出口商品 ？ 诸如此类的问题已经引起了人们持续而广泛的关注，迈克利 (1984)，拉尔，韦斯 (2006)，豪斯曼，黄禹锡和诺迪克（ 2007）等学者在他们的文献中都探讨了这一问题。这些学者是在对每种商品（主要）所占 国内生产总值进行了长期的调查后得出的这些结论。现有的文献中提出的这一观点是基于对国家所生产的具体的商品的数量而言的，而其对人均国内生产总值的影响是非常广泛的。这在肖特 (2004， 2008)的文献中都有记载。这一影响主要是两个方面的内容。一是“聚合”，这无法反映一个宽泛的关于商品或是
26、产业的定义。二是在此范围内不同生产厂家生产的产品的质量。我们认为，后者的贡献是巨大的，可能占主导地位，因此我们着手研究质量竞争这一模式是如何产生的。诸如此类的模式又是形成关于质量和贸易文献的基础，这一模式强调生产力和质量的作用无 论这一国家生产何种产品，这是关系整个国家国内生产总值的关键所在。撰写本文的一个目的是了解一个国家的能力，对于每一种商品的生产力以及产品质量，而这两者又决定了这个国家的商品生产和出口结构，并最终影响其人均 GDP 水平。 在最近的一篇名为“质量与贸易”的文献中，它强调了高质量与高市场占有率和高效益有密切的联系。很明显，这是对局部均衡模式的一个预测，即不同质量水平的生产者
27、面临着一个共同的单一的国内市场工作水平。然而，我们发现，包含有多种产品的均衡模式中，情况并非如此。如果我们考虑出口商的范围，将其对提高人均国内 生产总值的贡献进行排列，那么各国质量最好的出口商自然是领先的。但是，那些企业因为需要高知识分子作为劳动力，以及诸多的复杂因素使公司得以正常运作，往往伴随着最高的工资水平。这些出口商生产的高质量的产品，也就存在着更高的边际成本。在这一排列中排名最先的国家，总是面临着一个问题，其高质量的产品依赖于国内高质量劳动力的使用：一个国家富裕，那么就可以有较高的工资水平，以此来保证其在市场的参与。出于同样的原因，一个国家在特定的市场环境中也可以实现其质量水平在所有市
28、场方面的提升。但其市场份额下降，因为这些企业和工人会向其 它的或者更复杂的行业迁移。毫无疑问，苹果公司能够生产高质量的彩色电视机，并指挥高溢价，但是它却将精力转移到一个更复杂的行业，并获得了更多的收益。导致这一现象产生的原因是质量和市场占有率在一般贸易模式中存在并非单一。这种关系的形式取决于李嘉图式的对于比较优势因素的考虑。正是这一非单一的因素驱动了一系列国家按人均国内生产总值排名，使生产的每一种商品都实现平衡。 一旦我们建立了这种形式，并已明确其在质量上的差别，我们注意到，一个国家可以通过两种途径来致富：一是通过提高现有产品的质量或生产力，二是将产品向更复杂的方 向发展。本文开头列举的学者都
29、强调了结构改革的重大贡献。我们研究了过去 25 年中，在产品改革过程中不足人均国内生产总值的都为低收入国家。我们将这一现象解释为这些国家在进入新的市场领域时产品的质量较低。（我们承认，在某些情况下，这可以说是从大范围的市场进入一个相对要求不高的细分市场的过程。） 该模式的驱动方式是，如果我们排名商品是按照其生产能力来进行，那么当时的国家生产的产品到一定的相对数量和质量就能够使我们的产品达到更高的排名。这一稀缺能力 (肖特， 2001)概念是对当代市场的市场结构的一个较为中立的观点。如果企 业必须承担支付固定支出和发展自己的责任，那么这类公司找到适合自身长足发展的道路就会受到一定的限制：研发过程
30、中更大的质量弹性（生产能力）或其他固定支出，公司在产品研发与升级的过程中的投入与对手竞争，导致数量越少的生产者在市场中生存 (肖特 ， 1991， 2007)。 因此，即使所有国家的所有生产商都实现一致，一些能力仍然是稀缺而珍贵的。在一个各国继承历史不对称的环境中，或许这些能力会凸显出来。在本文中，我们只研究那些已给定的较为稀缺的能力，对进入和研发竞争机制的总 体平衡加以分析（肖特， 2007）。 一旦这些相对稀 缺能力的概念得以承认，那么一个国家现有的产品结构与其人均国内生产总值存在着显著的联系。在过去的二十年中，诸如此类的关系 已被大量的学者在文献中加以了研究。 本文着重强调出口商品的结构
31、，并以大量的研究数据为依据。虽然这些学者的方法在有些方面有所不同，这在文章的后面会加以解释，但是他们都会以这样的问题开始：一个国家的富裕程度是由其生产的平均水平决定。这与每种产品的生产者的财富有关联。其次，我们又研究了每个国家的产品结构，这样我们就可以计算出其出口的每种商品的加权平均数。这一指数构成了该国的隐含的人均国内生产总值 。我们的出发点在于分析那些分散的隐含的人均国内生 产总值的产品结构图。 文章已经探讨了那些财富方面的进步方式与在特定的行业集中的商品结构的变化以及质量和生产力的变化是有关联的。最重要的一点在于以传统的 6 位数级定义的重要的出口商出口的大多数商品来划分财富水平，这是非
32、常广泛的，并且在大部分产业变革或提高的情况下不会转向更加细分的数据。在理论层面，大范围的原因之一是不同的子行业的聚集 ;另一个原因在于事实，在任何行业里，一个设置大致均衡的多样化国家，会有一个可行的体现财富水平的生产范围。 这种生产者 财富范围的中间 性质指的是，在一个多样化市场的一般均衡设置中，质量与价格之间的关系是一方面，产量，销售收入以及全球市场份额又是另一方面，所以不是单方面。一个生产者的能力（财富等）的水平，在一个特定行业可行的范围内处于平衡状态。随着能力的提高，国家会进入排名更高的商品生产国，以及工资（或人均 GDP）的均衡上升。但是，这意味着它的产量，销售收入以及全球市场份额与能力也就是人均国内生产总值呈现一种倒 U 的关系。随着能力提高，市场份额上升，工资也上涨。由于国家进入更高的产品排名的生产国，工资上升会导致其有效的成本水平上升，以及在该行 业的全球市场份额的下降。正是这种倒 U 型关系，它的选择效果是链接一个国家的财富，其产品结构的基础。
