Transcript Movement of Labor and Capital Between Countries

5
MOVEMENT OF LABOR
AND CAPITAL BETWEEN
COUNTRIES
1
Movement of Labor
Between Countries
2
Movement of
Capital between
Countries
3
Gains from Labor
and Capital Flows
4
Conclusions
Introduction
• From May to September 1980, boatloads of
refugees from Cuba arrived in Miami.
• This would lead you to believe that these lessskilled workers would drive down wages.
• However, this immigration does not appear to
have pulled down the wages of other less-skilled
workers in Miami.
• Explaining this effect is one goal of this chapter.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
2 of 114
Introduction
• A similar situation occurred with the 1989
emigration of Russian Jews to Israel.
 The immigrants were more highly skilled than the
existing Israeli population.
 However, the relative wages of high-skilled workers in
Israel actually rose during the 1990s.
 In other large scale immigrations, the wages of
domestic workers did fall.
• Compare the predictions of short-run (specific
factors) and long-run (Heckscher-Ohlin) models.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
3 of 114
Introduction
• Then we will consider the effects of movement of
capital.
• Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) occurs when a
company from one country owns a company in
another country.
• Finally, we will discuss the gains to the host and
destination countries, and to the world, from the
movement of labor and capital.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
4 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
• Migration is the movement of labor from the
Foreign country to the Home country.
• The wages paid to labor and the rentals paid to
capital and land are determined by the prices of
goods purchased.
• Prices of goods are determined by the world
market for those goods.
• If prices of goods are fixed, how do the Home
wage and rentals paid change as labor moves
between countries?
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
5 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
• Effects of immigration in the Short Run SpecificFactors Model:
 In the short run, only labor is mobile across industries.
 Remember the resource equation: L = LM + LA
• Determining the Wage
 Assume the Foreign equilibrium wage, W*, is lower
than Home equilibrium wage, W.
 Workers will migrate from Foreign to Home.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
6 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
Figure 5.1 Home Labor Market
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
7 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
• Effect of Immigration on the Wage in Home
 We add the ΔL to figure 5.1,
 The PAMPLA shifts right by ΔL.
 The origin for manufacturing has not changed so PMMPLM
does not change.
• Effect of Immigration on the Wage in Home
 The new equilibrium Home wage is at B, at a lower wage.
 The extra workers are shared between both industries since
both industries have more workers, but fixed amounts of
capital and land.
 The wage declines due to the diminishing marginal product of
labor.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
8 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
The marginal
Immigration
product oftotal
increases
laborby
curve
labor
L,
shifts
right
shifting the
also by
origin
to L
0A’
Figure
5.2
Labor has
increased and
wages have
decreased at new
equilibrium, B
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
9 of 114
Immigration to the New World
APPLICATION
• Between 1870 and 1913, 30 million Europeans
left their homes in the “Old World” to emigrate to
the “New World.”
• The U.S. population increased by 17%.
• The New World had higher real wages
 In 1870, real wages in the New World were nearly 3
times higher than in Europe.
• Over time capital accumulated, so real wages in
both locations grew, but at a slower rate in the
New World.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
10 of 114
Immigration to the New World
APPLICATION
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Figure 5.3
11 of 114
Immigration to the US and Europe Today
APPLICATION
• These days, we see migration from developing countries
to wealthier ones.
 In many cases, the immigration includes a mix of low-skilled
workers and high-skilled workers.
• In the U.S. much of the recent debate focused on the
issue of illegal immigration.
 There are about 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.
 This often obscures the fact that the majority of immigrants are
legal.
• The combination of legal and illegal immigrants in the U.S.
creates a U-shaped pattern between the number of
immigrants and their educational level.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
12 of 114
Immigration to the US and Europe Today
APPLICATION
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Figure 5.4
13 of 114
Immigration to the US and Europe Today
APPLICATION
• Illegal immigrants into the U.S. compete primarily with the
lowest-educated workers.
• Legal immigrants compete with workers at the highest
educational levels.
• Under the specific factors model, the greatest impact on
labor will be for the lowest and highest educated U.S.
workers.
 This is supported by the data.
• The negative impact of immigration on wages is fairly
modest for most workers and is offset with capital moves
between industries as discussed later.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
14 of 114
EU’s New Tack on Immigration
HEADLINES
• A new EU-wide “green card” would allow skilled workers already
in the 25-nation bloc to change countries without extra
paperwork.
• Europe's work force is expected to shrink by 20 million between
now and 2040.
• Businesses complain regularly about a shortage of highly skilled
personnel.
• EU commissioner Franco Frattini has a vision:
 A North African engineer could go to work in Europe, earn good
money, and return regularly to his hometown to start and maintain
a business.
 Mr. Frattini uses the term “brain circulation” instead of the
accusatory term “brain drain.”
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
15 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
• Other Effects of Immigration in the Short Run
 U.S. and Europe have both welcomed foreign workers
in specific industries: agriculture and high-tech.
 Why do they do so if those foreign workers compete
with domestic workers in those industries.
 Answer: Immigration increases rental rates on capital
and land.
• Rentals on Capital and Land
 Given this, it should not be surprising that owners of
capital and land often support more open borders.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
16 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
• Need to consider the political economy of
immigration: lobby groups.
• Effect of Immigration on Industry Output
 We showed before that immigration led to an increased
labor force in each industry.
 With more workers and the same amount of capital and
land, output rises in both industries.
 Immigration leads to an outward shift in the PPF.
 This result depends on the short-run nature of the
specific factors model.
 If land and capital are not fixed, as in the long run, one
industry's output will rise while the other will fall.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
17 of 114
Movement of Labor Between Countries
Figure 5.5
Immigration causes an increase in
home labor which shifts out the
PPF, increasing production from A
to B,
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
18 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• In the long run, all factors are free to move between
industries.
• We now use the Heckscher-Ohlin model from before,
except that labor can move between countries.
• Total capital: K = KA + KM earning rental R.
• Total labor: L = LA + LM earning wage W.
• Computers are capital intensive and shoes are labor
intensive.
 As before: LS/KS > LC/KC and KC/LC > KS/LS
• How is equilibrium affected by the inflow of labor into
Home due to migration?
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
19 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
Figure 5.6
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
20 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• Box Diagram
 Figure 5.7 shows a new box diagram to help us answer
our question.
 Length is total amount of labor at Home, L.
 The vertical axes measure the total amount of capital,
K, at home, in each industry.
 OSA shows the amount of labor and capital used in
shoes and OCA in computers.
 The capital-labor ratio in each industry is the slope of
the respective industry line.
 OSA is flatter, so capital-labor ratio in shoes is less than in
computers.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
21 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
Labor allocated to computers
Figure 5.7
LC
L
0C
KC
Total Amount
of Capital in
the Economy
Capital
allocated to
computers
K
A
K
Capital
allocated to
shoes
KS
0S
LS
L
Labor allocated to shoes
Total Amount of Labor in the Economy
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
22 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• Determination of the Real Wage and Real Rental
 Remember: W = P*MPL and R=MPK
 If there is a higher capital-labor ratio, then MPL is higher
and MPK is lower.
 Because each line in the box diagram is a particular
capital-labor ratio, it is also a particular wage and rental
rate.
• Increase in the Amount of Home Labor
 Immigration leads to increase in the amount of Home
labor to L′ = L + ΔL.
 Instead of allocating the extra labor to both industries,
we allocate it all to shoes—the labor intensive industry.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
23 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• Increase in the Amount of Home Labor
 Because both labor and capital increase in shoes, the
capital-labor ratio is unchanged.
 Notice the slopes of the lines have not changed.
 Since the capital-labor ratios are unchanged, so are the
marginal products.
 Therefore the wages and rentals are unchanged.
 When capital can move freely between industries,
immigration in the long run has no impact on the wage
and rental rates.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
24 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
Figure 5.8
Increase in Home Labor
4. Decrease in Labor in the Computer industry
L’
L
3. Increase in
Capital in the
Shoe industry
K’
B
K
1. Increase in
Home labor due to
immigration:
additional labor
(ΔL) allocated to
shoes
L
0S
K’
2. Decrease in
Capital in the
Computer
industry
K
A
0’S
0C
L’
5. Additional
increase in Labor
in the Shoe
industry
ΔL
L
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
25 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• Effect of Immigration on Industry Outputs
 Since the factors of production both increase or
decrease, it makes sense that output will follow the
same trend.
 Since labor and capital moved to shoes, shoe output expands
and capital production contracts.
 On our PPF, due to the increase in labor, the PPF shifts
out more in the direction of shoes.
 Since prices are unchanged, the economy moves to
equilibrium at point B in Figure 5.9.
 More shoe production and less computer production
 This only holds in the long run.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
26 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
Figure 5.9
The Long-Run Effect on Industry
Outputs of an Increase in Home Labor
Output of
Shoes, QS
Shift in Home
PPF due to
immigration
Relative Price of
Computers, PC/PS
An increase of both
capital and labor in
shoe production
causes an increase in
shoe output and a
decrease in computer
output
Output of Computers,
QC
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
27 of 114
Effects of Immigration in the Long Run
• Rybczynski Theorem:
In the Heckscher-Ohlin model with two goods and
two factors, an increase in the amount of a factor
found in an economy will increase the output of
the industry using that factor intensively and
decrease the output of the other industry.
• Factor Price Insensitivity:
In the Heckscher-Ohlin model with two goods and two
factors, an increase in the amount of a factor found in
an economy can be absorbed by changing the outputs
of the industries, without any change in the factor
prices.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
28 of 114
The Effects of the Mariel Boat Lift on Industry Output in Miami
APPLICATION
• Figure 5.10 panel (a) shows real value added in
the apparel industry for Miami and the average of
comparison cities.
 Adjust for city size by looking at value added per capita.
 The industry decline in Miami is slightly slower than in
comparison cities after 1980.
• Panel (b) shows the output of a group of skillintensive industries.
 These industries fell more rapidly in Miami after 1980.
• These results support the Rybczynski Theorem
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
29 of 114
The Effects of the Mariel Boat Lift on Industry Output in Miami
APPLICATION
Figure 5.10 (a)
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
30 of 114
The Effects of the Mariel Boat Lift on Industry Output in Miami
APPLICATION
Figure 5.10 (b)
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
31 of 114
The Effects of the Mariel Boat Lift on Industry Output in Miami
APPLICATION
• Wages did not really change during this time.
• Is this also from the Rybczynski Theorem?
• During this time, computer use in manufacturing was
increasing significantly.
• This increase was much slower in Miami than in similar
cities.
• One explanation is that firms employed the Mariel
refugees and other low-skilled workers rather than
switching to computer technologies.
• This is just another example of how the refugees could be
absorbed across many industries.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
32 of 114
Immigration and US Wages, 1990 - 2004
APPLICATION
• There has been slightly more than a doubling of
foreign-born persons in the U.S. in 25 years.
• Table 5.1 reports the estimated impact of
immigration over 1990-2004 on wages of various
workers, distinguished by education level.
• When we allow capital to grow in each industry to
accommodate the inflow of immigrants (second
approach), total U.S. immigration has a negative
impact on only the lowest and highest-educated
workers.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
33 of 114
Immigration and US Wages, 1990 - 2004
APPLICATION
Table 5.1
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
34 of 114
Movement of Capital between Countries:
Foreign Direct Investment
• We can now look at how capital moves from one
country to another through foreign direct
investment (FDI).
 When a firm from one country owns a company in
another country.
• U.S. Department of commerce uses a 10% rule to
determine FDI.
 If a foreign country acquires 10% or more of a U.S.
firm, that is FDI inflow to the U.S.
 If a U.S. company acquires 10% or more of a foreign
firm then that is FDI outflow from the U.S.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
35 of 114
Movement of Capital between Countries:
Foreign Direct Investment
• Greenfield FDI—when a company builds a plant
in a foreign country.
• Acquisition FDI (or brownfield FDI)— when a firm
buys an existing foreign plant.
• Our focus here will be on Greenfield investment
• FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
 Manufacturing uses capital and labor.
 Agriculture uses land and labor.
 As capital moves into the economy, it will be used in
manufacturing, raising the marginal product of labor.
 Therefore it will shift out the curve PMMPLM
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
36 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
Increase in the Capital Stock in the Short Run
Wage, W
Equilibrium
shifts to
An
inflow of capital
point
B, increasing
into
the
wages and labor used
manufacturing
in manufacturing.
sector
shifts out the
Labor
is pulled
marginal
productout
of of
agriculture
labor in
labor
curve so
in that
that sector falls.
sector
PA· MPLA
W’
B
W
A
PM· MPL’M
PM· MPLM
0M
L
L’
LM
0A
LA
Total Labor in the Economy, L
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Figure 5.11 (a)
37 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
• Effect of FDI on the Wage
 The equilibrium wage increases to W′
 More workers are drawn in to manufacturing,
decreasing labor in the agricultural sector.
• Effect of FDI on the Industry Outputs
 Since land has not changed, output of agriculture falls.
 Since labor and capital increase in manufacturing,
output must increase.
 No change in prices of goods.
 As PPF increases, equilibrium shifts to B.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
38 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
Increase in the Capital Stock in the Short Run
Figure 5.11 (b)
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
39 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
• Effect of FDI on the Rentals
 Fewer workers are employed in agriculture, as each
acre of land cannot be used as intensively.
 Marginal product of land falls, therefore RT = PAMPTA must fall.
 More capital and labor are used in manufacturing
 RK = PMMPKM
 Increases in labor and capital have opposing effects on MPKM
 Ambiguous effect
 We can use another method for rental on capital.
 Calculate the revenue earned in manufacturing and subtract the
payments to labor.
 If wages are higher, and all else is the same, there must be a
reduced amount of funds left over as earnings of capital, so
rental rate is lower.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
40 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
• Effect of FDI on the Rentals
 We start at original equilibrium point A in Figure 5.12.




Assume capital stock expands from FDI.
Wages are held constant.
Labor used in manufacturing expands up to point C.
The capital-labor ratio for manufacturing is identical at A and
C—therefore MPKM and RK must also be equal
 If the manufacturing wage increases while holding
capital constant in that sector, we move from C to B.
 With less labor on each machine, the MPK and RK must fall.
 Because the rental rate on capital is the same at A and C but
lower at B than C, the overall effect of the FDI inflow is to
reduce the rental on capital.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
41 of 114
FDI in the Short Run: Specific Factors Model
Stock on the Rental on Capital
Increase in Home MPLM
due to FDI
Wage, W
Moving
from A
In
the movement
to C,Cwages
from
to B,
and hence
the
wages
increase
capital/labor
and
so does the
ratio do not
capital/labor
From this we
change
ratio
can conclude
that rental on
capital is lower
at B than A.
PA· MPLA
W’
B
W
C
A
PM· MPL’M
PM· MPLM
0M
L’
L
LM
Therefore rental on
capital falls when the
capital stock
increases through
FDI
0A
LA
L
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Figure 5.12
42 of 114
FDI in the Long Run
• We continue with the same assumptions as
before.
 Computers (shoes) are capital (labor) intensive.
• Effect of FDI on Outputs and Factor Prices
 Capital increase due to FDI.
 Box panel sides expand with new origin at O’C
 OSB is shorter than OSA so less labor and less capital
are used in the production of shoes and output falls.
 OCB is longer than OCA so more labor and more capital
are used and the output of computers rises.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
43 of 114
FDI in the Long Run
• Effect of FDI on Outputs and Factor Prices
 Change in output is from point A to B in panel (b).
 As the Rybczynski Theorem states, the increase in
capital through FDI has increased the output of the
capital-intensive industry and reduced the output of the
labor-intensive industry.
 Because capital-labor ratios are unchanged, the wage
and the rental on capital are also unchanged.
 In the long run model, an inflow of either factor of
production will leave factor prices unchanged.
 For immigration, we found actual cases where wages
were reduced (short run) and where wages were
constant (long run).
 There are fewer studies for FDI.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
44 of 114
The Effect of FDI on Rentals and Wages in Singapore
APPLICATION
• Singapore has encouraged foreign firms to establish
subsidiaries within its borders, especially in the electronics
industry.
• Singapore has the fourth-largest amount of FDI in the
world.
• What has happened to the rental rate and the wage?
• Table 5.2, part A, shows much of this.
 MPK has fallen due to diminishing returns.
 Each worker has more capital, so MPL increases.
 These are consistent with specific factors model.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
45 of 114
The Effect of FDI on Rentals and Wages in Singapore
APPLICATION
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Table 5.2 (a)
46 of 114
The Effect of FDI on Rentals and Wages in Singapore
APPLICATION
• Second approach to calculating the rental on capital.
 If capital was rented instead of purchased, what would the
rental be?
 If it invests PK at interest rate i, could expect PKi
 We must also consider depreciation on capital.
R PK
 Real rental is:

(i  d )
P
P
• Table 5.2 part B shows the growth rate in the real rental
computed from this formula.
 Real wages grow over time.
 This is not expected from our long run model.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
47 of 114
The Effect of FDI on Rentals and Wages in Singapore
APPLICATION
• This is an indication of productivity growth
 This leads to an increase in the MPL and in the real
wage.
Table 5.2 (b)
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
48 of 114
The Effect of FDI on Rentals and Wages in Singapore
APPLICATION
• In part B productivity growth is positive, but in part A it is
negative.
• The idea that Singapore might have no productivity growth
contradicts what many believe about its economy and that
of other fast-growing Asian countries.
• If there was no productivity growth then all growth is due
to capital accumulation.
 FDI has no spillover benefits.
• Most economists believe that productivity increased but
that belief is challenged by part A.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
49 of 114
Gains from Labor and Capital Flows
• Foreign investment and immigration are both
controversial policy issues.
• Most countries have at some point controlled FDI but
later became open to foreign investment.
• However, almost all countries impose limits on
immigration.
• U.S. immigration controls were established by the
Quota Law of 1921.
 Allows a limited number of persons arriving annually from
each country of origin
 See text for more of immigration law history.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
50 of 114
Gains from Labor and Capital Flows
• Why is immigration so controversial?
 Some groups oppose the spending of public funds on
immigration.
 Other groups fear the competition for jobs created by
an inflow of workers.
• Immigration benefits the host country in the
specific factors model.
• If immigrant earnings with Foreign income are
included then emigration benefits the Foreign
country, too.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
51 of 114
Gains from Immigration
• To measure gains from immigration we will use
the specific-factors model.
• We look at the total world labor with the Home
and Foreign labor together: L + L*.
• Home workers are measured from the left and
Foreign workers are measured from the right—on
the horizontal axis.
• We can see how many workers are located in
each country.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
52 of 114
Gains from Immigration
• Gains for the Home Country
 Even though all workers are paid the same wage. W’, the
first worker had an MPL equal to W
 Thus, MPL*P>W’; immigrants raise the value of output more
than they are paid in wages.
• Gains for the Foreign Country
 We need to include the wages received by the migrants who
left when calculating Foreign income.
 These wages are often returned to their families.
 The difference between the wage earned by the migrants
and their Foreign marginal products is the gain to Foreign.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
53 of 114
Gains from Immigration
World Labor Market
Workers move from
The
wage,
W
The Home
gains
to
Home
Foreign
to Home
untiland
determined
bymigration
A, is
Foreign from
equilibrium
is reached
at
higher
than
the Foreign
can
be
shown.
C, full migration, with
Wage W* at A*
wages equalized at W’
Foreign
Wage
Wage, W
A
W
Gains to
Home
B
W’
C
W*
A*
Gains to
Foreign
0
L
Home
Wage
0’
L’
L
L*
World amount of labor
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Figure 5.14
54 of 114
Immigrants and Their Remittances
SIDE BAR
• Immigrants often send a substantial portion of
their earnings back home—remittances.
• The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates
that remittances were $126 billion in 2004, up
from $72.3 million in 2001.
• The income sent home by immigrants is a larger
source of income than is official aid (Table 5.3).
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
55 of 114
Gains from Immigration
SIDE BAR
Table 5.3
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
56 of 114
Immigrants and Their Remittances
SIDE BAR
• The fact that immigrants return some of their income back
home may not be enough to compensate their home
countries for the loss of their labor.
• To calculate the gains, we need to include all the earnings
of the immigrants in their home countries’ income.
 In the case of highly-educated migrants, unless these migrants
return most of their earnings back home those countries lose from
the outflow of these workers.
• Jagdish Bhagwati, an economist, has proposed that
countries impose a “brain drain” tax on the outflow of
educated workers.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
57 of 114
Gains from Immigration
• World Gains from Migration
 Combining the gains to the Home and Foreign
countries we obtain the triangular region ABA*, the
world gains due to immigration.
 One way to think about world gains from migration is
that it equals the increase in world GDP due to
immigration.
 In practice, however, there are other costs that
immigrants bear
 Moving costs, payments to traffickers of illegal immigrants.
 These costs must be subtracted from the increase in
GDP in order to obtain the net gains.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
58 of 114
How Large are Moving Costs?
SIDE BAR
• Illegal immigrants are often willing to make high
payments to traffickers to move from one country
to another.
 Payments to traffickers are in Table 5.4.
• Even legal immigrants face some costs of
migration, paying for transportation, legal
expenses, wage discrimination, prejudice, etc.
• So moving costs are a lower-limit on the extra
income they expect to receive, added up over the
years they will be away.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
59 of 114
How Large are Moving Costs?
SIDE BAR
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Table 5.4
60 of 114
How Large are Moving Costs?
SIDE BAR
• When the costs of moving are high, then
immigrants need to work abroad for enough years
to more than cover these costs.
• In order to both have the income needed to pay
costs and have enough working years left to make
immigration worthwhile we expect immigrants to
be middle-aged.
 This supports evidence that immigrants are often in
their 30s or 40s.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
61 of 114
Gains from Migration
APPLICATION
• How large are the gains from migration?
• Net gains to the U.S. in this case equal the
increase in U.S. GDP.
Table 5.5
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
62 of 114
Gains from Migration
APPLICATION
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
Table 5.5
63 of 114
Gains from Labor and Capital Flows
• Gains from Foreign Direct Investment
 Figure 5.15 shows the world amount of capital on the
horizontal axis: K + K*.
 Foreign rental is higher than Home so capital will flow from
Home to Foreign.
• As capital enters Foreign, the marginal product of
capital will fall as will its rental.
• As capital leaves Home, the marginal product will rise
as will the rental.
• World gains are A* BA.
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
64 of 114
Gains from Foreign Direct Investment
World Capital Market
Foreign
Rental
Rental, R
Home
rentalwith
ratefull
(R) is
Equilibrium
Gains to Foreign
and
lower
than
Foreign
(R*).
capital
flow be
is at
B with
Home can
shown
rents equalized
R’
Capital
will moveatfrom
Home to Foreign to
receive a higher rental
Gains to
Foreign
A*
R*
B
R’
C
Gains to
Home
R
A
Home
Rental
K’
0
0’
K
K
K*
Figure 5.15
World amount of Labor
© 2008 Worth Publishers ▪ International Economics ▪ Feenstra/Taylor
65 of 114