Abstract
Krugman’s models of spatial resource allocation and trade convey robust theoretical insights with a parsimonious lucidity that appeals strongly to modern economists’ tastes. Those great pedagogical virtues also may limit the models’ utility in guiding empirical research on the dynamic processes ostensibly being addressed. Three reasons for this worry are elaborated in this comment: (1) they are meant to explain a set of “stylized” facts that abstract from important observed in homogeneities in the geography of development; (2) the modeling emphasis on demand-side externalities diverts attention from supply-side forces making for industrial localization; and (3) Krugman’s treatment of the role of the state ignores inefficiencies arising from locational tournaments involving local government subsidization of firms in footloose industries.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
