PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ

FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES

Especialidad Economía

Economía Internacional 2

Profesora: Gabriela Cuadra ECO209

Correo electrónico: gabriela.cuadra@gmail.com 2018-II

1. Descripción del curso

En este curso se proveerá una presentación más avanzada y rigurosa de los

conceptos y modelos introducidos en Economía Internacional 1 y se abarcarán
nuevos temas. Los temas que se estudiarán son: las teorías básicas del comercio
internacional, modelos con economías de escala y competencia imperfecta,
costos del comercio, acuerdos comerciales. Asimismo, se estudiarán las
implicancias de incorporar heterogeneidad en las firmas y en la calidad del
producto final a través del uso de diferentes tipos de tecnología y/o trabajadores.

Libros de texto:

Feenstra, R. 2003. Advanced International Trade, Princeton University Press.

Feenstra, R. 2016. Advanced International Trade, Princeton University Press.

Krugman, P, M, Obstfeld y Marc, M. 2012. Economía Internacional.

J., N., Bhagwati, A., Panagariya, y T.N. Srinivasan.1998. Lectures on Internacional

Trade.

2. Contenido

2.1. El Modelo Ricardiano

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 1.

2.2. Extensiones del modelo Ricardiano

- Costinot, A. 2009. “On the origins of comparative advantage”, Journal of

International Economics, 77, pp. 255-264.
- *Dornbusch, R., S. Fischer y P.A. Samuelson. 1977. “Comparative
Advantage, Trade and Payments in a Ricardian Model with a Continuum of
Goods”, The American Economic Review, 67(5), pp. 823-39.
- Flam, H. y E., Helpman 1987. “Vertical Product Differentiation and the
North-South Trade”, The American Economic Review, 77(5), pp. 810-822.

2.3. El Modelo Heckscher-Ohlin.

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 1-2

1
PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES
Especialidad Economía

- Rybczynski, T. M. 1955. “Factor Endowment and Relative Commodity

Prices”, Economica, 22(88), pp. 336-341.
- Stolper, Wolfgang y Paul Samuelson. 1941. “Protection and Real Wages”,
Review of Economic Studies, 9(1), pp. 58-73.

2.4. Extensiones del Modelo Heckscher-Ohlin

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 2-3

- Dornbusch, R., S. Fischer y P.A. Samuelson. 1980. “Heckscher-Ohlin
Theory with a Continuum of Goods”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 95(2)
pp. 203-24.

2.5. Verificación empírica de la Teoría Básica del Comercio

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 2-3

- *Bernhofen, D. y J. Brown .2004. “A Direct Test of the Theory of
Comparative Advantage: the Case of Japan”, The Journal of Political
Economy, 112(1), pp.48-67.
- *Bernhofen, D. y J. Brown. 2005. “An Empirical Assessment of the
Comparative Advantage Gains from Trade: Evidence from Japan”, The
American Economic Review, 95(1), pp. 208-225.
- Davis D, y P. Mishra. 2007. “Stolper-Samuelson is dead and other crimes of
both theory and data”, en A. Harrison (editora): Globalization and Poverty.
NBER.

2.6. Economías de Escala y Modelos de Competencia Imperfecta

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 5.

- *Feenstra, R. 2016. Capítulo 5 y 6.
- Davis, D. 1998. "The Home Market, Trade, and Industrial Structure", The
American Economic Review, 88 (5), pp.1264-1276.
- Dixit, A. K., y J. E. Stiglitz. 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum
Product Diversity", The American Economic Review, 67 (3) pp. 297-308.
- Krugman, P. 1979. "Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition, and
International Trade", Journal of International Economics, 9 (4), pp. 469-479.
- *Krugman, P. 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the
Pattern of Trade", The American Economic Review, 70 (5), pp. 950-959.
- Romalis, John. 2004. "Factor Proportions and the Structure of Commodity
Trade", The American Economic Review, 94 (10), pp. 67-97.
- *Hallak, J., 2006. “Product quality and the direction of trade”, Journal of
International Economics, 9 (4), pp. 238-265.
- Matsuyama, K. 2015. “The Home Market Effect and Patterns of Trade
between Rich and Poor Countries”, mimeo.

2.7. La ecuación de la gravedad

- *Feenstra, R. 2003. Capítulo 5.

- *Feenstra, R. 2016. Capítulo 5 y 6.

2
PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES
Especialidad Economía

- Anderson, J. 1979. “A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation”, The

American Economic Review, 69(1), pp. 106-16.
- Anderson, J. y E. Van Wincoop. 2003. “Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to
the Border Puzzle”, The American Economic Review, 93(1), pp. 170-92.
- *Arkolakis, C., Costinot, A., y A., Rodríguez-Clare. 2012. “New Trade
Models Same Old Gains?”, The American Economic Review 102(1), pp. 94-
130.
- Fajgelbaum, P. y A. Khandenwal. 2016. “Measuring the Unequal Gains
From Trade”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131 (3), pp.1113-1180.
- Helpman, E. 1987. “Imperfect Competition and International Trade:
Evidence from Fourteen Industrial Countries”, Journal of the Japanese and
International Economies, 1, pp. 62-81.
- *Hummels, D. y J. Levinsohn. 1995. “Monopolistic Competition and
International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence”, Quarterly Journal of
Economics, 110(3), pp. 799-836.
- McCallum, J. 1995. “National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade
Patterns”, The American Economic Review, 85(3), pp. 615-623.
- *Waugh, M. 2010. “International Trade and Income Differences”, The
American Economic Review, 100(1), pp. 2093-2124.
- *Yi, K. 2010. “Can Multistage Production Explain the Home Bias in Trade?”,
The American Economic Review, 100(1), pp. 364-93.

2.8. Heterogeneidad de las firmas y comercio internacional

- Bernard, A. B., Eaton, J., Jensen, B., y S., Kortum. 2003. "Plants and
Productivity in International Trade", The American Economic Review 93(4)
pp. 1268-1290.
- *Bustos, P. 2011. "Trade Liberalization, Exports, and Technology
Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinian Firms",
The American Economic Review, 101(1), pp. 304-340.
- *Kugler, M. and E. Verhoogen. 2008. “The Quality-Complementarity
Hypothesis: Theory and Evidence from Colombia”, NBER Working Paper
14418.
- *Melitz, Marc. 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations
and Aggregate Industry Productivity", Econometrica, 71 (6) pp.1695-1725.
- *Melitz, Marc y Gianmarco Ottaviano. 2008. "Market Size, Trade and
Productivity", Review of Economic Studies 75 (1) pp. 295-316.

2.9. Las implicancias del comercio, evidencia empírica: Distribución salarial

- *Amiti, M. y L. Cameron. 2012. “Trade Liberalization and the Wage Skill

Premium: Evidence from Indonesia”, Journal of International Economics, 87
(2), pp.277-287.
- *Brambilla, I., D., Lederman, G., Porto.2012. “Exports, Export destinations
and Skills”, The American Economic Review, 102(7), pp. 3406-3468.
- *Bustos, P. 2011. “The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Skill Upgrading:
Evidence from Argentina”, mimeo.
- Goldberg, P. y N. Pavcnik. 2007. “Distributional Effects of Globalization in
Developing Countries”, Journal of Economic Literature, 45 (1), pp. 39‐82.

3
PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES
Especialidad Economía

- *Hummels, D., R. Jorgensen, J. Munch, y C. Xiang (2014): “The Wage

Effects of Outsourcing: Evidence from Danish Matched Worker‐Firm Data”,
The American Economic Review,104(6) pp.1597-1629.
- *Traiberman, S. 2015. “Occupations and Import Competition Evidence from
Danish Matched Employee-Employer Data”, JMP, mimeo.
- Verhoogen, E. 2008. “Trade, Quality Upgrading and Wage Inequality in the
Mexican Manufacturing Sector”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123 (2),
pp.489-530.

2.10. Las implicancias del comercio, evidencia empírica: Empleo/desempleo y

pobreza

- *Autor, D., D. Dorn, y H.Gordon. 2013. “The China Syndrome: Local Labor
Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States”, The American
Economic Review, 103 (6), pp.2121-2168.
- *Atkin, D. 2016. “Endogenous Skill Acquisition and Export Manufacturing in
Mexico”, The American Economic Review, 106(8), pp. 2046-2085.
- *Juhn, C., G. Ujhelyi, y C.Villegas‐Sanchez. 2014. “Men, Women, and
Machines: How Trade Impacts Gender Inequality”. Journal of Development
Economics, 106, pp 179-193.
- *McCaig, B. y N. Pavcnik.2014. “Export Markets and Labor Allocation in a
Poor Country”, NBER Working Paper No. 20455.
- *Topalova, P. 2010. “Factor Immobility and Regional Impacts of Trade
Liberalization: Evidence on Poverty from India”, The American Economic
Journal: Applied Economics, 2, pp.1-41.
- Ottaviano, G., G., Peri, y G.Wright. 2013. “Immigration, Offshoring, and
American Jobs”, The American Economic Review,103(5), pp.1925-1959.

2.11. Las implicancias del comercio, evidencia empírica: comercio y finanzas

- *Amiti, M. y D. Weinstein. 2011. “Exports and Financial Shocks”, Quarterly

Journal of Economics, 126, pp.1841-1877.
- Antràs, P. y C. F. Foley. 2015. "Poultry in Motion: A Study of International
Trade Finance Practices", Journal of Political Economy, 123(4), pp.809-852.
- Behrens, Kristian, Gregory Corcos, y Giordano Mion. 2013. “Trade Crisis?
What Trade Crisis?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(2), pp-
702–709.
- *Chor, D. y K. Manova. 2012. “Off the Cliff and Back: Credit Conditions and
International Trade during the Global Financial Crisis”, Journal of
International Economics, 87, pp.117-133.
- *Foley, F. y K. Manova. 2015. “International Trade, Multinational Activity,
and Corporate Finance”, Annual Review of Economics, 7, pp.119-146.
- Manova, K. 2008. "Credit Constraints, Equity Market Liberalizations and
International Trade", Journal of International Economics, 76, pp.33-47.
- *Manova, K. 2013. “Credit Constraints, Heterogeneous Firms and
International Trade", Review of Economic Studies, 80, pp.711-744.
- *Kalemli-Ozcan, S., Kamil H., y C. Villegas-Sanchez. 2016. “What Hinders
Investment in the Aftermath of Financial Crises: Insolvent Firms or Illiquid
Banks?”, The Review of Economic and Statistics, 98 (4), pp.756-769.

4
PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DEL PERÚ
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS SOCIALES
Especialidad Economía

- *Levchenko, A., L., Lewis, y L. Tesar, 2010. “The Collapse of International

Trade During the 2008-2009 Crisis: In Search of the Smoking Gun”, IMF
Economic Review, 58(2), pp. 214-253.
- *Paravisini,D..V. Rappoport, P. Schnabl y D. Wolfenzon. 2015. “Dissecting
the Effect of Credit Supply on Trade: Evidence from Matched Credit-Export
Data”, Review of Economic Studies, 82, pp. 333–359.

2 Evaluación

Habrá un examen parcial, un examen final, dos tareas y presentaciones en clase. El

examen parcial tendrá un peso de 30% en la nota final del curso y el examen final
tendrá un peso de 35%. Las tareas tendrán un peso de 15% y las presentaciones
constituirán un 15% de la nota del curso. Cada presentación será sobre un artículo de
la sección de Contenido marcado con un * y durará 30 minutos. El último componente
de la nota del curso estará determinado por la asistencia y participación en clase. Se
espera que los alumnos asistan a todas las clases y que lean los capítulos/artículos
correspondientes al material antes de cada clase. El componente de asistencia y
participación en clase tendrá un peso de 5% en la nota final.

Examen Parcial (30%)

Examen Final (35%)
Tareas (7.5% cada una)
Presentación (15%)
Asistencia y participación en clase (5%)