This article examines the link between relative export, import and domestic goods’ prices and relative wages over the years by empirically testing the Stolper–Samuelson theorem for India. It also examines the role of other factors such as manufacturing trade, liberalization phase, inflation, foreign and domestic technology, etc. on rising wage inequality in the manufacturing sector in India.
The results seem to prove the validity of Stolper–Samuelson theorem. The results also throw some light on Rybczynski theorem, which shows the relationship between output and endowment and factor price insensitivity elasticity, and the link between factor endowments and factor prices. The empirical testing is done using estimates of the translog production function and translog cost function along with the share equations. The elasticity of substitution between factors of production has been worked out using Allen’s and Morishima’s formulae, which in turn use estimates of the translog cost function.
AcemogluD. (2003). Labour and capital augmenting technical change. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(1), 1–37.
2.
AcemogluD. (2005). Liberalization and wage inequality in India. Working Paper, No. 156, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi.
3.
BerndtE. R.ChristensenL. R. (1973). The translog function and the substitution of equipment, structures, and labor in US manufacturing 1929–68. Journal of econometrics, 1(1), 81–113.
4.
BorjasG.J.FreemanR.B.KatzL.F.DiNardoJ.AbowdJ.M. (1997). How much do immigration and trade affect labour market outcomes?Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1997(1), 1–90.
5.
ChamarbagwalaR. (2006). Economic liberalization and wage inequality in India. World Development, 34(12), 1997–2015.
ClineW (1997). Trade and wage inequality. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
6.
DiewertW. E. (1971). An application of the Shephard duality theorem: a generalized Leontief production function. The Journal of Political Economy, 481–507.
7.
DiewertW. E.(1974). Applications of duality theory. In
IntriligatorMichael D.KendrickDavid A.(Ed.). Frontiers of Quantitative Economics, Vol. II, Amsterdam, 106–171.
8.
GoldinC.KatzL.F. (1998). The origins of technology–skill complementarity. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 693–732.
9.
GrilichesZ. (1969). Capital–skill complementarity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 51(4), 465–468.
10.
KohliUlrich R. (1978). A gross national product function and the derived demand for imports and supply of exports. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 11(2), 167–182.
11.
KohliUlrich RKohliU. (1991). Technology, duality, and foreign trade: The GNP function approach to modeling imports and exports. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
12.
KrugmanP.CooperR.N.SrinivasanT.N. (1995). Growing world trade: Causes and consequences. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1995(1), 327–377.
13.
KrugmanP.R. (1995). Growing World Trade: Causes and Consequences. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 26(1, 25th Anniversary Issue), 327–377.
14.
KrusellP.OhanianL.E.Ríos RullJ.V.ViolanteG.L. (2000). Capital skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis. Econometrica, 68(5), 1029–1053.
15.
KumarU.MishraP. (2008). Trade liberalization and wage inequality: Evidence from India. Review of Development Economics, 12(2), 291–311.
16.
LawrenceR. Z. (1996). Single World, Divided Nations?: International Trade and the OECD Labor Markets. Brookings Institution Press.
17.
MachinS.Van ReenenJ. (1998). Technology and changes in skill structure: Evidence from seven OECD countries. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(4), 1215–1244.
18.
RamaswamyK.V. (2008). Wage inequality in Indian manufacturing: Is it trade, technology or labour regulations? Working Paper, No. 2008–021, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai.
19.
RosenS. (1968). Short–run employment variation on class–I railroads in the US, 1947–1963. Econometrica, 36(3–4), 511–529.
20.
SenK. (2008). Trade policy and wage inequality: Evidence from Indian manufacturing. Indian Growth and Development Review, 1(2), 147–171.
21.
SternerT. (1985). Structural change and technology choice: energy use in Mexican manufacturing industry, 1970–1981. Energy Economics, 7(2), 77–86.
22.
SternerT. (1989). Factor demand and substitution in a developing country: Energy use in Mexican manufacturing. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 91(4), 723–739.
23.
StolperW.F.SamuelsonP.A. (1941). Protection and real wages. The Review of Economic Studies, 9(1), 58–73.
24.
TopalovaP. (2007). Trade liberalization, poverty, and inequality: Evidence from Indian districts. In HarrisonA. (Ed.), Globalization and poverty (pp. 291–336). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
25.
UzawaH. (1962). Production functions with constant elasticities of substitution. The Review of Economic Studies, 29(4), 291–299.
26.
ZellnerA. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(298), 348–368.
