Page 227 - Global Political Economy_Understanding The International Economic Order
P. 227

CHA PTER E IGHT
                                   with cumulative experience and is determined to a considerable de-
                                   gree by the initial pattern ofspecialization.
                                     These important considerations that “international comparative
                                   advantage in the production ofand sale ofhigh-technology goods
                                   .... must be struggled for and earned through superior technological
                                   innovativeness” has significantly intensified what F. M. Scherer has
                                   labeled “international high-technological competition.” 28  The drive
                                   for technological superiority has notably increased the receptivity of
                                   governments to the “new trade theory.”
                                   New Trade Theory
                                   The most important and certainly the most controversial development
                                   challenging the conventional theory ofinternational trade is the “new
                                   trade theory,” more commonly known as “strategic trade theory”
                                   (STT). Therefore, I repeat here much of my earlier discussion of stra-
                                   tegic trade theory. Strategic trade theory is the culmination ofearlier
                                   challenges to conventional trade theory because it incorporates a
                                   growing appreciation ofimperfect competition, economies ofscale,
                                   economies ofscope, learning by doing, the importance ofR & D,
                                   and the role oftechnological spillovers. STT is significant because it
                                   challenges the theoretical foundations of the economics profession’s
                                   unequivocal commitment to free trade. In fact, STT originated with
                                   the development ofnew analytical tools and growing dissatisfaction
                                   with conventional trade theory and its inability to explain the increas-
                                   ing trade problems ofthe United States, especially with respect to
                                                    29
                                   Japan in the 1980s. The application to trade theory ofnovel meth-
                                   ods associated with important theoretical advances in the field ofin-
                                   dustrial organization provided the means to develop an alternative to
                                   the H-O model. Mathematical models ofimperfect competition and
                                   game theoretic models were first incorporated into trade theory in
                                   the early 1980s by James Brander and Barbara Spencer (1983), two
                                   theorists ofindustrial organization. 30  Before I consider the theory,
                                   however, I will discuss oligopolistic competition briefly.




                                    28
                                      F. M. Scherer, International High-Technology Competition (Cambridge: Harvard
                                   University Press, 1992), 5.
                                    29
                                      David B. Yoffie and Benjamin Gomes-Casseres, International Trade and Competi-
                                   tion: Cases and Notes in Strategy and Management, 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-
                                   Hill, 1994), 5–17.
                                    30
                                      James A. Brander and Barbara J. Spencer, “International R & D Rivalry and In-
                                   dustrial Strategy,” Review of Economic Studies 50 (1983): 707–22.
                                   214
   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232