The assignment given Professor Myint was limited to endogenous institutional variables. He has dutifully therefore eliminated from consideration exogenous institutional variables such as the multinational corporation, and endogenous non-institutional variables such as Nurkse’s demonstration effect, (1953, pp. 63–67) although new wants are mentioned on p. 385.
KeywordsComparative Advantage Custom Union Collective Good Traditional Sector Modern Sector
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bhagwati, J., ‘Immiserizing Growth: A Geometrical Note’, Review of Economic Studies, XXV, 68 (June, 1958).Google Scholar
- Chacholiades, M., ‘Balance of Payments Equilibrium with Imports as a Factor of Production’, doctoral dissertation, M.I.T. (June, 1964).Google Scholar
- Cooper, C. A. and Massell, B. F., ‘Towards a General Theory of Customs Unions for Developing Countries’, Journal of Political Economy, LXXIII, 5 (Oct., 1965).Google Scholar
- Kindleberger, C. P., ‘The Rise of Free Trade in Western Europe, 1820–1875’, Journal of Economic History, XXXV, 1 (March, 1975).Google Scholar
- Linder, S. B., Trade and Trade Policy for Development, (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1967).Google Scholar
- Nurkse, R., Problems of Capital Formation of Underdeveloped Countries, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1953).Google Scholar
- Pincus, J., ‘A Positive Theory of Tariff Formation Applied to Nineteenth- century United States’, doctoral dissertation (Stanford University, 1972 (to be published).Google Scholar
- Vanek, J., ‘An Afterthought on the “Real Cost-Opportunity Cost Dispute” and some Aspects of General Equilibrium under Conditions of Variable Factor Supplies’, Review of Economic Studies, XXVI, 71 (June, 1959).Google Scholar