comparative advantage

(redirected from Ricardo's Law)

Comparative advantage

Theory suggesting that specialization by countries can increase worldwide production.
Copyright © 2012, Campbell R. Harvey. All Rights Reserved.

Comparative Advantage

The ability of an individual, company, or economy to conduct an activity better than another for some fixed, almost unchangeable reason. Comparative advantage is important in making decisions such as what products one should make or sell; if a company is unable to make a product as well as another and that is unlikely to change, the company might be well advised to make a different product. For example, a lumber company in Oregon has a comparative advantage to a lumber company in Arizona because there are simply more trees in Oregon. This makes it unlikely that the company in Arizona will be able to fill orders as well or as quickly as the company in Oregon. For this reason, the Arizona company's management might consider investing in mining instead of lumber.
Farlex Financial Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc. All Rights Reserved

comparative advantage

Collins Dictionary of Business, 3rd ed. © 2002, 2005 C Pass, B Lowes, A Pendleton, L Chadwick, D O’Reilly and M Afferson
Comparative advantageclick for a larger image
Fig. 24 Comparative advantage. The physical output of X and Y from a given factor input, and the opportunity cost of X in terms of Y. The opportunity cost of producing one more unit of X is 1Y in country A, and 2/3 Y in country B. The opportunity cost of producing one more unit of Y is 1X in country A, and 11/2X in country B.

comparative advantage

the advantage possessed by a country engaged in INTERNATIONAL TRADE if it can produce a given good at a lower resource input cost than other countries. Also called comparative cost principle. This proposition is illustrated in Fig. 24 with respect to two countries (A and B) and two GOODS (X and Y). The same given resource input in both countries enables them to produce either the quantity of Good X or the quantity of Good Y indicated in Fig. 24. It can be seen that Country B is absolutely more efficient than Country A since it can produce more of both goods. However, it is comparative advantage not ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGE that determines whether trade is beneficial or not. Comparative advantage arises because the marginal OPPORTUNITY COSTS of one good in terms of the other differ as between countries (see HECKSCHER-OHLIN FACTOR PROPORTIONS THEORY).

It can be seen that Country B has a comparative advantage in the production of Good X for it is able to produce it at a lower factor cost than Country A; the resource or opportunity cost of producing an additional unit of X is only 2/3 Y in Country B, whereas in Country A it is 1Y .

Country A has a comparative advantage in the production of Good Y for it is able to produce it at lower factor cost than Country B; the resource or opportunity cost of producing an additional unit of Y is only 1X, whereas in Country B it is 11/2X.

Both countries, therefore, stand to increase their economic welfare if they specialize (see SPECIALIZATION) in the production of the good in which they have a comparative advantage (see GAINS FROM TRADE for an illustration of this important proposition). The extent to which each will benefit from trade will depend upon the real terms of trade at which they agree to exchange X and Y.

A basic assumption of this presentation is that factor endowments, and hence comparative advantages, are ‘fixed’. Dynamically, however, comparative advantage may well change. It may do so in response to a number of influences, including:

  1. the initiation by a country's government of structural programmes leading to resource redeployment. For example, a country that seemingly has a comparative advantage in the supply of primary products such as cotton and wheat may nevertheless abandon or de-emphasize it in favour of a drive towards industrialization and the establishment of comparative advantage in higher value-added manufactured goods;
  2. international capital movements and technology transfer, and relocation of production by MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES. For example, Malaysia developed a comparative advantage in the production of natural rubber only after UK entrepreneurs established and invested in rubber-tree plantations there. See COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE (OF COUNTRIES).
Collins Dictionary of Economics, 4th ed. © C. Pass, B. Lowes, L. Davies 2005
References in periodicals archive ?
An indirect link between these two theories, along with a confirmation of Ricardo's law of diminishing returns, can be eventually detected in Maide's chapter.
In this context, we can now see how Bastiat's law and Ricardo's law of association can be articulated.
(16) That these relationships seem to hold here only between individuals contributing in different sectors is the outcome of our simplified presentation which is only intended to outline the relationship between Bastiat's law and Ricardo's law. Since we have here two workers, one in each sector, the Ricardian-type relationship will be visible only between actors of the two different sectors.
Classical economists will relish eight case studies demonstrating Ricardo's law of diminishing returns.
This same idea is developed much further by Mises, particularly in his discussion of what he calls "Ricardo's Law of Association." The key difference between the two is that Mises' analysis is informed by two other ideas: the development of marginalist thinking by Menger and others, and Mises' own work on the centrality of monetary calculation and entrepreneurship.
Mises (1966, p.159ff) saw that this principle, which he called "Ricardo's Law of Association," could be generalized to all market exchange.
Companies have figured out Ricardo's law. One need only look at the huge run-up in global stock markets of recent months to see the surge in action.
Yet George often referred to "Ricardo's law of rent," and shared Ricardo's political belief "that workers and investors have a common cause against the landowners, landholders and land speculators." EDWARD J.
Histories of economics frequently refer to 'Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage' in eulogistic terms.
The article therefore concludes that, if the LCA is understood in its modern sense, incorporating an implication for international specialisation, then Ricardo did not have an LCA, and the expression 'Ricardo's Law of Comparative Advantage' is a misnomer and a misinterpretation of Ricardo.