The Economics of Reciprocity: Theory and Evidence on Bilateral Trading Arrangements

  • Richard E. Caves


Most modern research on the theory of price discrimination in general equilibrium has sprung from the interest of countries in forming customs unions or free-trade areas. Yet these two forms of integration far from exhaust the kinds of preferential agreements that are observed in real life. The theorists have been conscious that their analyses potentially apply to a much wider set of arrangements — witness the titles of the two leading contemporary treatises [18], [38]. But they have not used their apparatus to explore all the positive and normative questions raised by some of these other types of discriminatory arrangements. Nor, perforce, has the general-equilibrium theory of discrimination been applied to these questions in practice.


Price Discrimination Club Member Preferential Trading Engel Curve Internal Prex 
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]
    Ahuja, K. ‘India’s Trade with Eastern Europe–A Comment’, Indian Economic Journal, ix, (January 1962) 361–5.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Ammer, D. S. ‘Realistic Reciprocity’, Harvard Business Review, xl, (January-February 1962 ) 116–24.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Anderson, J. P. ‘Reciprocal Dealing’, Yale Law Journal, lxxvi, (April 1967) 1020–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Baldwin, R. E. ‘Equilibrium in International Trade: a Diagrammatic Analysis’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, lxii, (November 1948) 748–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Becker, G. S. ‘A Note on Multi-Country Trade’, American Economic Review, xlii, (September 1952) 55868.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Bock, B. ‘Mergers and Reciprocity’, Conference Board Record, ii, (July 1965) 27–36.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cooper, C. A. and Massell, B. F. ‘Toward a General Theory of Customs Unions for Developing Countries’, Journal of Political Economy, lxxiii, (October 1965) 461–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Dauner, J. R. ‘The Attitude of the Purchasing Agent Toward Reciprocity’, Journal of Purchasing, ix, (August 1967) 5–15.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Dave, S. ‘India’s Trade Relations with East European Countries, 1952–53–1959–60, A Study in Bilateralism’, Indian Economic Journal, ix, (July 1961) 48–68.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Dave, S. ‘India’s Trade with East European Countries–Rejoinder’, Indian Economic Journal, vx, (April 1962) 479–83.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Dean, J. ‘Economic Aspects of Reciprocity, Competition and Mergers’, Antitrust Bulletin, viii, (September-December 1963 ) 843–52.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    DE Looper, J. H. C. ‘Current Usage of Payments Agreements and Trade Agreements’, I.M.F. Staff Papers, ix, (August 1955) 339–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    DE Neuman, A. M. ‘“Tied” International Trading–the Indonesian Rami Fibre Test Case’, Economic Journal, lxiv, (June 1954) 324–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Ferguson, J. M. ‘Tying Arrangements and Reciprocity: An Economic Analysis’, Law and Contemporary Problems, xxx, (summer 1965) 552–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Finney, F. R. ‘Reciprocity and Public Policy’, Antitrust Law and Economics Review, ii, (summer 1969) 97–110.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Hale, G. E. and Hale, R. D. ‘Reciprocity under the Antitrust Laws: A Comment’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, cxiii, (November 1964) 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [16a]
    Henderson, A. M. ‘A Geometrical Note on Bulk Purchase’, Economica, xv, (February 1948) 61–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [17]
    Johnson, H. G. ‘An Economic Theory of Protectionism, Tariff Bargaining, and the Formation of Customs Unions’, Journal of Political Economy, lxxiii, (June 1965) 256–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [18]
    Kemp, M. C. ‘A Contribution to the General Equilibrium Theory of Preferential Trading’, Contributions to Economic Analysis, No. 61, ( Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co., 1969 ).Google Scholar
  20. [19]
    Lewis, H. T. ‘No Matter What you Call It–It’s Still Reciprocity’, Purchasing, lii, (15 January 1962 ) 74–5.Google Scholar
  21. [20]
    Lewis, H. T. ‘The Present Status of Reciprocity as a Sales Policy’, Harvard Business Review, xvi, (spring 1938 ) 299–313.Google Scholar
  22. [21]
    Mccreary, E. JR, and Guzzardi, W. JR, ‘A Customer is a Company’s Best Friend’, Fortune, lxxi, (June 1965) 180–2.Google Scholar
  23. [22]
    Meade, J. E. A Geometry of International Trade, (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd, 1952 ).Google Scholar
  24. [23]
    Mikesell, R. F. and Behrman, J. N. Financing Free World Trade with the Sino-Soviet Bloc, Princeton Studies in International Finance, No. 8, Princeton, N.J., ( International Finance Section, Princeton University, 1958 ).Google Scholar
  25. [24]
    Modigliani, F. ‘New Developments on the Oligopoly Front’, Journal of Political Economy, lxvi, (June 1958) 215–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [25]
    Robinson, J. The Economics of Imperfect Competition, ( London: Macmillan, 1933 ).Google Scholar
  27. [26]
    Sen, S. India’s Bilateral Payments and Trade Agreements, 1947–48 to 1963–64, ( Calcutta: Bookland Private Ltd, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  28. [27]
    Simon, L. S. ‘Industrial Reciprocity as a Business Strategy’, Industrial Management Review, vii, (spring 1966 ) 27–39.Google Scholar
  29. [28]
    Sloane, L. ‘Reciprocity: Where Does the P.A. Stand?’, Purchasing, li, (20 November 1961 ) 70–9.Google Scholar
  30. [29]
    Stocking, G. W. and Mueller, W. F. ‘Business Reciprocity and the Size of Firms’, Journal of Business, xxx, (April 1957) 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [30]
    Trued, M. N. and Mikesell, R. F. Postwar Bilateral Payments Agreements, Princeton Studies in International Finance, No. 4, Princeton, N.J., (International Finance Section, Princeton University, 1955 ).Google Scholar
  32. [31]
    Turner, D. F. ‘Conglomerate Mergers and Section 7 of the Clayton Act’, Harvard Law Review, lxxviii, (May 1965) 1313–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [32]
    U.N.O. Economic Commission for Africa, Bilateral Trade and Payments in Africa, U.N.O. Doc. E/CN 14/Stc/24 (1963).Google Scholar
  34. [33]
    U.N.O. Economic Commission for Africa, General Review of Activities in Trade and Customs, U.N.O. Doc. E/CN 14/W.P. 1 /3 (1966).Google Scholar
  35. [34]
    U.N.O. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, ‘State Trading in Countries of the E.C.A.F.E. Region’, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development New York: United Nations, 1964. Vol. vii, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
  36. [35]
    U.N.O. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, ‘Trade between Developing E.C.A.F. E. Countries and Centrally Planned Economies’, Economic Bulletin for Asia and the Far East, xv, (June 1964) 16–51.Google Scholar
  37. [36]
    U.N.O. Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, ‘Trade Liberalization in the E.C.A.F.E. Region’, The Asian Development Bank and Trade Liberalization, Regional Economic Cooperation Series, No. 2. U.N.O. Doc. E/CN 11 /707 (1965).Google Scholar
  38. [37]
    U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Economic Report on Corporate Mergers: Staff Report, in U.S. Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly, Economic Concentration Hearings pursuant to S. Res. 40. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1969. Part 8A.Google Scholar
  39. [38]
    Vanek, J. General Equilibrium of International Discrimination: the Case of Customs Unions. Harvard Economic Studies, Vol. 123 ( Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965 ).Google Scholar
  40. [39]
    Verbit, G. P. Trade Agreements for Developing Countries ( New York: Columbia University Press, 1969 ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Richard E. Caves 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard E. Caves
    • 1
  1. 1.Harvard UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations