trade

trade One of the reasons for trade is specialization of production. Some examples are obvious. European countries are not very successful in growing bananas. Similarly, the distribution of natural resources like coal, iron ore, and oil has always been unequal. Thus each country specializes in producing those commodities in which it has a comparative advantage. Specialization allows economies of scale because it is more efficient to produce for a large world market than for a much smaller national market. The commodities imported rather than produced at home will always require less productive inputs than would be required under home production. Trade is thus an unqualified benefit to all parties, irrespective of whether trade is fair or a country is competitive.

But the fact that trade is universally advantageous does not mean that the benefits are equally distributed. The impact of imperial free trade policies on 19th‐cent. India boosted the export of raw cotton to Britain but had a devastating impact on Indian cotton manufactures. Variations in natural resources, in which some countries are rich (Russia) and some are relatively very poor (Japan), and in technology, barriers to trade, and historical experience of development have maintained and augmented these differences.

There is little doubt that international trade and specialized production played a major part in the growth of the industrial economies in the 18th and especially the 19th cent. But the less developed countries have argued that trade has not been beneficial for them since they have been peripheral to those with greater comparative advantage. Indeed it has become a radical criticism of the free market system that it prospered through the exploitation of the less developed countries by the industrial nations. Hence the support for import substitution policies and attempts to persuade the developed world to help by allowing trade on terms favourable to the less developed.