Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Heckscher-Ohlin (H-O) model, a cornerstone of international trade theory developed in the 1920s by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin, posits that countries export goods that utilize their abundant factors of production and import goods that require factors they lack. This model relies on several key assumptions, including differences in factor endowments across nations and constant returns to scale. However, the phenomenon of ‘factor intensity reversal’ presents a challenge to the model’s predictions. This refers to a situation where a country’s comparative advantage in the production of a good reverses as its relative factor endowment changes, contradicting the H-O theorem’s stable relationship between factor abundance and trade patterns.
The Heckscher-Ohlin Model: A Recap
The H-O model fundamentally states that a country will specialize in the production and export of goods that intensively use its relatively abundant factors of production. For instance, a country with abundant labor will specialize in labor-intensive goods, while a capital-abundant country will specialize in capital-intensive goods. This specialization leads to gains from trade as countries consume beyond their production possibilities frontiers.
Defining Factor Intensity Reversal
Factor intensity reversal occurs when the relative factor intensity in the production of a good changes as one moves along a production function. Specifically, it means that a good that is capital-intensive at low levels of output (or low relative factor prices) becomes labor-intensive at higher levels of output (or high relative factor prices). This is a deviation from the standard neoclassical assumption of factor intensity remaining constant.
Why Factor Intensity Reversal is Incompatible with the H-O Model
The incompatibility arises from the core assumptions of the H-O model. The model assumes that factor intensities are fixed. If factor intensity can reverse, the basis for comparative advantage becomes unstable and unpredictable. Here’s a breakdown:
- Fixed Factor Proportions: The H-O model often assumes fixed factor proportions (though not necessarily), meaning the ratio of capital to labor used in production remains constant. Factor intensity reversal directly violates this assumption.
- Stable Comparative Advantage: The H-O model predicts a stable pattern of comparative advantage based on a country’s initial factor endowments. If factor intensity reverses, a country’s comparative advantage can shift, leading to unpredictable trade patterns.
- Implications for Trade Patterns: If a good is initially capital-intensive and a country is capital-abundant, the H-O model predicts export of that good. However, if factor intensity reverses as output increases, the good may become labor-intensive, potentially leading to import specialization if the country is relatively labor-abundant at that higher output level.
An Illustrative Example
Consider the production of textiles and steel. At low levels of output, steel production might be capital-intensive (requiring a high capital-labor ratio). However, as steel production expands significantly, it may become possible to substitute capital with labor, making steel production relatively labor-intensive. Conversely, textile production might initially be labor-intensive, but with technological advancements and increased scale, it could become capital-intensive. This reversal undermines the H-O model’s prediction of stable comparative advantage.
The Leontief Paradox and Empirical Evidence
The Leontief Paradox (1953) provided early empirical evidence challenging the H-O model. Wassily Leontief found that the US, despite being capital-abundant, exported labor-intensive goods and imported capital-intensive goods. While not directly demonstrating factor intensity reversal, it highlighted the model’s limitations and prompted further research into the complexities of trade patterns. Subsequent research has shown that factor intensity reversals can occur in certain industries, particularly those with scale economies and non-constant factor proportions.
Addressing the Incompatibility
Modern trade models, such as those incorporating increasing returns to scale and imperfect competition, attempt to address the limitations of the H-O model and account for phenomena like factor intensity reversal. These models recognize that trade patterns are more complex than simply reflecting differences in factor endowments.
Conclusion
In conclusion, factor intensity reversal is fundamentally incompatible with the core assumptions of the Heckscher-Ohlin model. The H-O model relies on fixed factor proportions and stable comparative advantage, both of which are undermined when factor intensity can change with output levels. While the H-O model remains a valuable starting point for understanding international trade, its limitations necessitate the use of more sophisticated models that can account for real-world complexities like factor intensity reversal and increasing returns to scale.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.