SAMVAD: International Journal of Management

Bryanna Till ¹, Kishore G. Kulkarni ²

Affiliations
1 Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver, 2201 South Gaylord Street, Denver, CO 80208, US
2 Distinguished Professor of Economics, Chief Editor, International Review of Business and Economics, Campus Box 77, P. O. Box 173362, College of Business, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, CO 80217-3362, US

Abstract

Many individuals remember the Golden Triangle as the drug trafficking center of the World. However, Thailand, Myanmar and Laos have each taken contrasting paths of economic development. The paper aims to explore the countries’ varying approaches to tariff policy and its effects on the economy. The first part of the paper describes some of the important theoretical perspectives to international trade such as comparative advantage, the Heckscher-Olin theorem and the gravity model, before discussing tariffs and other obstructions to free trade. The next part of the paper delves deeper into the tariff policies of the Golden Triangle countries and their effects. Thailand emerges as the most economically successful of the three countries and she has successfully used tariffs to implement more sustainable development. Myanmar still has several tariffs and sanctions, except for when dealing with other ASEAN countries. The instability of the government is a concern for Myanmar if they want to become more successful. The Laotian government has recently cut most tariffs and is starting to see much more development and economic growth as a result. The paper concludes that, free trade is imperative to economic success and free trade is perfectly represented in the differing stages of development that the three counties currently occupy. Hopefully, each can continue to develop and prosper through more liberalization of their economies.

Keywords

International Trade Benefits, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Trade Policies

Full Text

   

Dan Meylor ¹, Kishore G. Kulkarni ²

Affiliations
1 Economics Major, Department of Economics, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Campus Box 77, P. O. Box 173362, Denver, CO 80217-3362, US
2 Distinguished Professor of Economics, Chief Editor, International Review of Business and Economics, (www.irbejournal.com), Campus Box 77, P. O. Box 173362, College of Business, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, CO 80217-3362, US

Abstract

Mexico joined the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1986 and less than a decade later joined the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the United States and Canada in 1994. Before these trade liberalizing moves, Mexico had hit a few bumps in the road when it came to stimulating economic growth. Unfortunately, the post NAFTA world and especially the COVID-19 world have only left more bruises on Mexico’s economy. Most economists will agree that the Mexican economy is currently in struggling shape and that some positive effects of NAFTA did not help. The purpose of this paper is to point out the small handful of economic aspects from NAFTA that had a positive effect on Mexican Trade and the Mexican economy. After explaining each aspect of what worked and why it did not last, we will conclude with what we can learn from this and what can be changed looking forward.

Keywords

Free Trade, NAFTA Effects, Mexican Economy, Trade Agreements.

Full Text

   

Tianyue (Steven) Gu ¹, Kishore G. Kulkarni ²

Affiliations
1 Student in International Studies, University of Denver, 2201 Gaylord Street, Denver, CO 80208, US
2 International Review of Business and Economics, Campus Box 77, P. O. Box 173362, College of Business, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, CO 80217-3362, US

Abstract

This paper aims to explain and test Jagdish Bhagwati’s theory on Immiserizing Growth, focusing on export elasticity of demand. The Immiserizing Growth Hypothesis refers to the phenomenon when a country’s economic growth through international trade harms its citizens’ welfare because its Terms of Trade (TOT) deteriorate from increased exports (Bhagwati, 1958). Since then, other scholars have argued the theory lacks real-world consideration and finds almost no real-world case where the theory holds (Pryor, 2007). The core of Bhagawati's theory is not just the relationship between the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth and increase in the poverty rate, but also how the deterioration of TOT and increasing trade cause Immiserizing Growth. How does the elasticity of a country’s export sector affect that country’s TOT? Does Dr. Bhagwati’s causation still stand today? The paper's first section explains Bhagwati’s theory in detail and examines past publications and studies on Immiserizing Growths. Then, the study applies the approach to Madagascar’s economy from 1993 to 2008, excluding fiscal years 2002 and 2003 due to election violence. The case study hopes to establish causality between export supply inelasticity and the occurrence of Immiserizing Growth using empirical data. Lastly, the paper concludes with potential future case study plans and impacts.

Keywords

Country Study: Madagascar, Economic Growth and Terms of Trade, Immiserizing Growth Theory

Full Text