Comparative Advantage and Development Policy



In the great revival of interest in economic development that has marked the past decade, attention has centered on two main questions: first, what determines the over-all rate of economic advance?; second, what is the optimal allocation of given resources to promote growth? Analysis of the growth rate has relied mainly on the Keynesian tools and has produced a multiplicity of aggregate growth models. The second question, however, reopens more ancient economic issues, and their analysis must start from the classical and neo-classical solutions. Only very recently have the two types of discussion tended to come together in the more comprehensive framework of general equilibrium analysis.


Development Policy Foreign Exchange Comparative Advantage Shadow Price Growth Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B. A. Balassa, The Hungarian Experience in Economic Planning. New Haven 1959.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    W. Baer, “ Puerto Rico: an Evaluation of a Successful Development Program,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Nov. 1959, 73, 645–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bank of Israel, Annual Report, 1959. Jerusalem 1960.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. M. Bator, “ On Capital Productivity, Input Allocation, and Growth,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Feb. 1957, 71, 86–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    N. S. Buchanan, International Investment and Domestic Welfare. New York 1945.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    O. Castellino, “ La Scelta degli Investimenti nei Programmi di Sviluppo Economico,” L’ Industria, 1959, No. 1, 60–76.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. E. Caves, Trade and Economic Structure. Cambridge 1960.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. B. Chenery, “ The Application of Investment Criteria,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Feb. 1953, 67, 76–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. B. Chenery,“ The Role of Industrialization in Development Programs,” Am. Econ. Rev., Proc., May 1955,45, 40–57.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. B. Chenery, “ Development Policies and Programmes ”; Econ. Bull. for Latin America, Mar. 1958, 3, 51–77.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. B. Chenery, “The Interdependence of Investment Decisions,” in Abramovitz et al., The Allocation of Economic Resources. Stanford 1959.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M.Dobb, An Essay on Economic Growth and Planning. London 1960.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Dorfman, P. A.Samuelson, AND R. M. Solow, Linear Programming and Economic Analysis. New York 1958.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    O. Eckstein, “ Investment Criteria for Economic Development and the Theory of Intertemporal Welfare Economics,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Feb. 1957, 71, 56–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R.Frisch, A Method of Working out a Macroeconomic Plan Frame with Particular Reference to the Evaluation of Development Projects, Foreign Trade and Employment. Oslo 1958 (mimeo.).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R.Frisch, A Powerful Method of Approximation in Optimum Investment Computations of the Normal Type. Oslo 1959 (mimeo.).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Galenson AND H. Leibenstein, “ Investment Criteria, Productivity, and Economic Development,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Aug. 1955, 69, 343–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Gerschenkron, “Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective,” in B. Hoselitz, ed., The Progress of Underdeveloped Areas Chicago 1952.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Government Of India Planning Commission, The Third Five Year Plan. New Delhi 1960.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    G.Haberler, “Some Problems in the Pure Theory of International Trade,” Econ. Jour. June 1950,60 223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    E.Hagen, “ An Economic Justification of Protectionism,” Quart. Jour. Econ. Nov. 1958, 72496–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    B. Higgins, Economic Development. New York 1958.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. O.Hirschman, The Strategy of Economic Development. New Haven 1958.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. O. Hirschman, “ Investment Criteria and Capital Intensity Once Again,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Aug. 1958, 72, 469–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. E. Kahn, “ Investment Criteria in Development Programs,” Quart. Jour. Econ. Feb. 1951,6538–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    C. P. Kindleberger, The Terms of Trade: A European Case Study. New York 1956.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    R. Komiya, “A Note on Professor Mahalonobis’ Model of Indian Economic Planning,” Rev. Econ.Stat. Feb. 1959,41, 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    H.Leibenstein, “Why Do We Disagree on Investment Policies for Development ? ” Indian Econ. Jour. Apr. 1958,5, 369–86.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    W. A.Lewis, “ Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labor,” Manchester School, May 1954.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. C. Mahalanobis, “The Approach of Operational Research to Planning in India,” Sankhya, Dec. 1955, 16, 3–131.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    K. Mandelbaum,The Industrialization of Backward Areas. Oxford 1945.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    J. M. Montias, “ Planning with Material Balances in Soviet-type Economies,” Am. Econ. Rev., Dec. 1959, 49, 963–85.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    H. Myint, “ The Classical Theory of International Trade and the Underdeveloped Countries.” Econ. Jour., June 1958, 68, 317–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    G. Myrdal,Economic Theory and Under-developed Regions. London 1957.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    H.Neisser, “Investment Criteria, Productivity and Economic Development,” Quart. Jour. Econ. Nov. 1956,70 644–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    R.Nurkse,Problems of Capital Formation in Underdeveloped Countries. Oxford 1953.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    R.Nurkse,Patterns of Trade and Development. Stockholm 1959.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    P. G. Ohlin, “ Balanced Economic Growth in History,” Am. Econ. Rev., Proc., May 1959, 49, 338–53.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    The Philippines National Economic Council, The Five-Year Economic and Social Development Program for Fiscal Years1957–1961 Manila 1957.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    J. J. Polak, “ Balance of Payments Problems of Countries Reconstructing with the help of Foreign Loans,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Feb. 1943, 57, 208–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    R.Prebisch,“Commercial Policy in the Underdeveloped Countries,” Am. Econ. Rev., Proc. May 1959,49 251–73.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    A.Qayum,Theory and Policy of Accounting Prices. Amsterdam 1959.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    P. Rosenstein-Rodan, “Problems of Industrialization of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe,” Elon. Jour., June-Sept. 1943, 53, 205–16.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    W. W. Rostov, “ The Take-Off into Self-Sustained Growth,” Econ. Jour., Mar. 1956, 66, 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    J.Sandee, A Long-Term Planning Model for India. United Nations pub. New York 1959.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    T. W.Schultz, “ Latin American Economic Policy Lessons,” Am. Econ. Rev., Proc., May 1956, 46, 425–32.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    T. Scitovsky, “ Two Concepts of External Economies,” Jour. Pol. Econ., April 1954, 62, 143–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    T. Scitovsky, “Growth—Balanced or Unbalanced,” in M. Abramovitz et al., The Allocation of Economic Resources, Stanford 1959.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    A. K.Sen, “ Some Notes on the Choice of Capital Intensity in Development Planning,” Quart. Jour. Econ., Nov. 1957, 71, 561–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    J.Sheahan, “International Specialization and the Concept of Balanced Growth,” Quart. Jour. Econ. May 1958, 72183–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    H. W.Singer, “ The Distribution of Gains Between Investing and Borrowing Countries,” Amer. Econ. Rev., Proc., May 1950, 40, 473–85.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    G. Stigler, “Production and Distribution in the Short Run,” reprinted in Am Econ. Assoc., Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution Philadelphia 1946.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    P.Streeten, “Unbalanced Growth,” Oxford Econ. Papers, June 1959, 11, 167–91.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    J. Tinbergen, “The Relevance of Theoretical Criteria in the Selection of Investment Plans,” in M. Millikan, ed., Investment Criteria and Economic Growth Cambridge 1955.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    J. Tinbergen,Economic Policy: Principles and Design. Amsterdam 1956.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    J. Tinbergen, The Design of Development. Baltimore 1958.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    United Nations, Department Of Economic And Social Affairs, Analyses and Projections of Economic Development. New York 1955.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    United Nations, Department Of Economic And Social Affairs,Analyses and Projections of Economic Development. III. The Economic Development of Columbia. Geneva 1957.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    United Nations, Department Of Economic And Social Affairs, Analyses and Projections of Economic Development. V. The Economic Development of Argentina. Mexico City 1960.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    United Nations, Department Of Economic And Social Affairs, Analyses and Projections of Economic Development. VI. The Industrial Development of Peru. Mexico City 1959.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    United Nations, Manual of Economic Development Projects. New York 1959.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    A. Vaidyanathan, “A Survey of the Literature on Investment Criteria and Development of Underdeveloped Countries,”Ind. Econ. Jour. Oct. 1956,4 122–44.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    J. Viner,International Trade and Economic Development. Oxford 1953.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    J. Viner, “ Stability and Progress: The Poorer Countries’Problem,” in D. Hague, ed., Stability and Progress in the World Economy London 1958 (with comment by R. Nurkse).Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    P.Wiles, “Growth versus Choice,” Econ. Jour. June 1956,66, 244–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    J. H. Williams, “ The Theory of International Trade Reconsidered,” Econ. Jour., June 1929, 39, 195–209. Reprinted in Am. Econ. Assoc., Readings in the Theory of International Trade, Philadelphia 1949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Royal Economic Society and the American Economic Association 1965

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations