Miklós Koren

ECONOMIES OF SCALE AND THE SIZE OF EXPORTERS

Exporters are few-less than one-fifth among U.S. manufacturing firms-and are larger than non-exporting firms-about 4-5 times more total sales per firm. These facts are often cited as support for models with economies of scale and firm heterogeneity as in Melitz (2003). The authors find that the basic Melitz model cannot simultaneously match the size and share of exporters given the observed distribution of total sales. Instead exporters are expected to be between 90 and 100 times larger than non-exporters. It is easy to reconcile the model with the data. However, a lot of variation independent of firm size is needed to do so. This suggests that economies of scale play only a minor role in determining a firms export status. The authors show that the augmented model also has markedly different implications in the event of a trade liberalization. Most of the adjustment is through the intensive margin and productivity gains due to reallocation are halved.

Pricing to Firm: An Analysis of Firm- and Product-Level Import Prices

We use Hungarian Customs data on product-level imports and exports of manufacturing firms to document that the import price of a particular product varies substantially across buying firms. Importantly, we can relate the level of import prices to firm characteristics such as size, foreign ownership and market power. We develop a theory of ‘pricing to firm’ (PTF), where markups depend on the technology and competitive environment of the buyer. The predictions of the model are confirmed by the data: import prices are higher for firms with greater market power, and for intermediate inputs with a high share in material costs. We take account of the endogeneity of the buyers market power with respect to higher import prices. We show that even if unobserved cost heterogeneity within product categories is substantial, it is uncorrelated with our variables of interest. The magnitude of PTF is big: the standard deviation of price predicted by PTF is 21.5%.

Per-shipment costs and the lumpiness of international trade

Using detailed U.S. and Spanish export data, we document that trade costs of a per-shipment nature are associated with less frequent and larger shipments (i.e., more lumpiness) in international trade. This finding is pervasive across broad product categories, but most apparent for industrial supplies, parts and accessories, and food products.

Financial Globalization, Portfolio Diversification, and the Pattern of International Trade

The paper provides a general-equilibrium model where incomplete international financial markets lead to insufficient industrial specialization and low international trade. As international portfolio diversification is limited and productivity is uncertain, investors wish to maintain a diversified industrial structure rather than specializing according to their comparative advantage. Financial globalization then induces more specialization and more trade. The present framework yields explicit closed-form solutions for the volume and the structure of trade. Empirical results support the implications of the theory. Trade in financially open countries is (i) higher, (ii) more dependent on productivity differences, and (iii) less sensitive to industry risks.

Winners and Losers of Globalization: Sixteen Challenges for Measurement and Theory

Abstract The goal of this chapter is to summarize the state of the art in research in international trade and global production, and discuss issues relevant to European policymakers. Much of recent research on globalization is primarily empirical, owing to the proliferation of available data. We begin by discussing recent advances in measuring the causes and effects of globalization, and discussing the particular data challenges that have emerged. We then turn to theories of trade and global production, first summarizing the conclusions on which there is a broad consensus in the field. We discuss new insights that may be relevant for policy-makers, and open research questions. Introduction The fortune of workers, consumers and firms increasingly depends on other countries. This global interdependence is driven by the flow of goods, capital, ideas and people across countries. This chapter summarizes research about two aspects of globalization: international trade in goods and services, and the international fragmentation of production. We first summarize the overarching themes that are common to both topics. We conclude with a set of open questions, and propose an agenda for better connecting academic research with the needs of policy-making. We also discuss data challenges facing economists and policy-makers alike. The primary motivation of theories of globalization is to explain how international interactions differ from domestic interactions, and why they occur in the first place. Why do countries trade goods with one another? Why do some companies locate part of their production abroad? Canonical models of trade and globalization explain the magnitude and patterns of cross-country movements, and their welfare implications. An almost tautological conclusion of these models is that if countries choose to interact with one another, they must be better off than being in isolation. Models may differ in the magnitude of the gains from trade they predict, but these gains are almost uniformly positive. A central theme is that globalization benefits some more than others. In fact, some may even become worse off as their country becomes more open to the flow of goods, ideas, and people. For example, workers in import-competing industries stand to lose when countries open up to trade. These distributional effects of globalization are widely studied both theoretically and empirically.

Implicit Band within the Announced Exchange Rate Band

The paper provides an explanation to the policy of implicit exchange rate bands. Especially when introducing a new exchange rate band or modifying the old one, central banks often intervene intra-marginally, targeting a narrower band than that announced. The theoretical literature provides little clue to understand this phenomenon. The models either do not differ-entiate between the mechanism of announced (known) and implicit (unknown) exchange rate bands, or fail to account for the central banks incentives in exchange rate policy. I present a model, which both distinguishes the announced from the true target zone and endogenizes the choice of the bandwidth. I argue that implicit bands are a mean to signal the objectives of exchange rate policy. Announcement of the bandwidth cannot credibly do this, since it is not binding for the central bank. That is, the announcement is only partially believed. On the other hand, the choice of the actual bandwidth may serve as a costly signal. Since stability-concerned central banks are more likely to accept the costs of intervening intra-marginally, narrow implicit bands may effectively communicate the preferences for exchange rate stabil-ity. I conclude that a low level of reputation and a high concern of exchange rate stability both make the policy of implicit band more likely.