Editing Comparative advantage (section)

===Earlier empirical work===
Two of the first tests of comparative advantage were by MacDougall (1951, 1952).<ref>{{multiref2|1={{cite journal|last=MacDougall|first=G. D. A.|author-link=Donald MacDougall| title=British and American exports: A study suggested by the theory of comparative costs. Part I| journal=[[The Economic Journal]]| year=1951| volume=61 | issue=244|pages=697–724|doi=10.2307/2226976 |jstor=2226976 |ref=none}}|2={{cite news|last=MacDougall|first=G. D. A.|author-mask=1|title=[..] Part II|journal=The Economic Journal| year=1952| volume=62 | issue=247|pages=487–521|ref=none}}}}</ref> A prediction of a two-country Ricardian comparative advantage model is that countries will export goods where output per worker (i.e. productivity) is higher. That is, we expect a positive relationship between output per worker and the number of exports. MacDougall tested this relationship with data from the US and UK, and did indeed find a positive relationship. The statistical test of this positive relationship was replicated with new data by Stern (1962)<ref>{{cite journal|last=Stern|first=Robert M.|title=British and American productivity and comparative costs in international trade|journal=[[Oxford Economic Papers]]|year=1962|volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=275–296|doi=10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a040903 }}</ref> and [[Béla Balassa|Balassa]] (1963).<ref>{{cite journal|last=Balassa|first=Béla|author-link=Béla Balassa| title=An empirical demonstration of classical comparative cost theory| journal=[[The Review of Economics and Statistics]]|year=1963 |pages=231–238|doi=10.2307/1923892 |jstor=1923892 }}</ref>

Dosi et al. (1988)<ref>{{cite book|last1=Dosi|first1=Giovanni|author-link=Giovanni Dosi|last2=Pavitt|first2=Keith|author2-link=Keith Pavitt|last3=Soete|first3=Luc|author3-link=Luc Soete|title=The Economics of Technical Change and International Trade | year=1990 |publisher=Harvester Wheatsheaf|isbn= 978-0745000329}}</ref> conducted a book-length empirical examination that suggests that international trade in manufactured goods is largely driven by differences in national technological competencies.

One critique of the textbook model of comparative advantage is that there are only two goods. The results of the model are robust to this assumption.<ref name="Dornbusch1977" /> generalized the theory to allow for such a large number of goods as to form a smooth continuum. Based in part on these generalizations of the model,<ref>{{cite journal | last=Davis|first=Donald R.|author-link=Donald R. Davis (economist)| title=Intraindustry Trade: A Heckscher-Ohlin-Ricardo Approach | journal=[[Journal of International Economics]]| volume=39 | year=1995 | issue=3–4 | pages=201–226 | doi=10.1016/0022-1996(95)01383-3| citeseerx=10.1.1.557.8401 }}</ref> provides a more recent view of the Ricardian approach to explain trade between countries with similar resources.

More recently, Golub and Hsieh (2000)<ref>{{cite news |author1=Golub, S. |author2=C-T Hsieh | title=Classical Ricardian Theory of Comparative Advantage Revisited | journal=Review of International Economics | volume=8 | issue=2 | year=2000 | pages=221–234 }}</ref> presents modern statistical analysis of the relationship between relative productivity and trade patterns, which finds reasonably strong correlations, and Nunn (2007)<ref>{{cite journal|last=Nunn|first=Nathan|author-link=Nathan Nunn|title=Relationship-Specificity, Incomplete Contracts, and the Pattern of Trade|doi=10.1162/qjec.122.2.569|journal=[[The Quarterly Journal of Economics]]| volume=122 | issue=2 | year=2007 |pages=569–600|url=https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/nunn/files/contracts_trade_qje.pdf|access-date=31 March 2025}}</ref> finds that countries that have greater enforcement of contracts specialize in goods that require relationship-specific investments.

Taking a broader perspective, there has been work about the benefits of international trade. Zimring & Etkes (2014)<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Zimring|first1=Assaf|last2=Etkes|first2=Haggay|date=January 2015|title=When Trade Stops: Lessons from the 2007–2010 Gaza Blockade|journal=[[Journal of International Economics]]|volume=95|issue=1|pages=16–27|doi=10.1016/j.jinteco.2014.10.005}}</ref> find that the [[blockade of the Gaza Strip]], which substantially restricted the availability of imports to Gaza, saw labor productivity fall by 20% in three years. [[James Markusen|Markusen]] et al. (1994)<ref>{{cite book|last1=Markusen|first1=James R.|author1-link=James Markusen|last2=Melvin|first2=James R.|last3=Kaempfer|first3=William H.|last4=Maskus|first4=Keith E.|year=1994 |title=International Trade: Theory and Evidence |url=http://www.colorado.edu/Economics/courses/Markusen/textbook/mmkm3.pdf |access-date=2014-08-13 |page=218 |publisher=McGraw-Hill |isbn=978-0070404472 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150131180218/http://www.colorado.edu/Economics/courses/Markusen/textbook/mmkm3.pdf |archive-date=2015-01-31 |url-status=dead }}</ref> reports the effects of moving away from [[autarky]] to [[free trade]] during the [[Meiji Restoration]], with the result that national income increased by up to 65% in 15 years.
{{clear}}