Discuss whether the use of protectionist policies can ever be justified during a period of worldwide recession or whether governments should follow Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s advice to adopt a policy of greater free trade. [N2013 25]

Protectionism refers to the imposition of economic policies aimed at restricting trade between countries, designed to protect domestic businesses and workers from foreign competition, while free trade refers to the exchange of goods and services across international boundaries. Recently, governments have been adopting protectionist measures in the belief that this would offset the impacts on their economies from the worldwide recession. Fundamentally, the question is: during a period of worldwide recession, can protectionism be justified, or should governments adopt a policy of free trade, to address the macroeconomic problems of rising unemployment and lack of economic growth? This economics paper argues that, while some would argue that protectionist policies can be justified during a worldwide recession, governments should still follow Premier Wen’s economic advice to pursue a policy of greater international free trade.  

There are many methods used by various countries to protect their economies, but fundamentally these methods either discourage imports or encourage a country’s own exports.  For example, a tariff is a tax levied on imports, where a specific tariff is levied as a fixed charge per unit while an ad valorem tariff is levied as a fraction of the value of a unit. A tariff raises import prices, hence causing consumers to switch from imports to locally produced goods. An import quota is a direct restriction on the quantity of imports. The quota is typically enforced by issuing licenses to a group of individuals or firms. The quota directly reduces the availability of imports, hence pushing up prices of imported goods. Per unit output subsidies can be given to help local producers lower their production costs, which enable them to better compete with more efficient foreign producers. These methods, among others, arguably can protect the domestic economy during a period of recession. 

On the one hand, it can be strongly argued that protectionism can be justified on grounds of employment protection. Protectionism arguably helps the economy against both demand-deficient and structural unemployment. First, during a period of recession, protection may be used to reduce demand-deficient unemployment, where there is insufficient AD to fully utilise the unemployed resources in the economy, because imports are discouraged while exports are encouraged, which theoretically boosts AD, shifting it to the right. Furthermore, trade restrictions are sometimes imposed during an economic downturn to reduce cyclical unemployment. For example, under trade union pressure, governments may decide to curb imports that are in direct competition with domestically-produced goods in order to preserve the jobs in these industries. 

Second, protectionism can also be given to declining sunset industries to slow down their contraction, thus allowing more time for labour to be retrained and re-channelled to other growing sunrise industries. This reduces the degree of structural unemployment, which can be defined as the unemployment arising from the mismatch of skills in the industry as the structure of the economy changes. Many developing countries, especially China, and developed economies, such as Singapore, face structural unemployment as the production structure of the economy as well as demand conditions change and mature. Hence, protectionism can be justified through employment protection. 

However, there are many limitations of protectionism in addressing a situation of worldwide recession. First, protectionism creates a “beggar-thy-neighbour” effect whereby the exports, output, and employment of its trading partners are reduced, which in turn curbs the exports, output, and employment of the country initiating the protectionist measures. Secondly, with protectionism, trading partners are likely to “retaliate” and impose their own import restrictions, again further causing the initiating country’s exports, output, and employment to subsequently suffer even more. For instance, China may face countermeasures if it were to implement protectionist measures on the USA, which would not benefit both countries. 

Furthermore, although the initial intention may only be to offer temporary protection to help smoothen the adjustment and reallocation of resources, protection is politically difficult to remove, once it has been put in place. Vested interests are created and the industries concerned will inevitably resist any removal of trade barriers. In the long run, the country might end up having resources being locked in inefficient ‘sunset’ industries, hence depriving its expanding ‘sunrise’ industries of precious economic resources. For instance, this occurred in Latin America after WWII under the system of Import Substitution Industrialisation, as contrasted with the success of the East Asian countries which pursued Export Oriented Industrialisation. All these limitations reduce the usefulness of protectionism in addressing a situation of worldwide recession. 

On the other hand, other than the limitations of protectionism, international trade might in fact help a country tide a recession. First, developing economies sometimes lack sufficient domestic demand to enable full utilisation of resources. Trade allows such countries to overcome domestic demand constraints by giving them access to larger world markets. With additional demand coming from exports, greater utilisation of otherwise unemployed resources raises output, income, and employment. For instance, Singapore, a small and open economy, depends upon trade as an engine of growth for her national income and employment. Furthermore, rising export demand further stimulates investments, causing the AS to shift outwards faster. These investments, for example in infrastructure facilities like ports and storage warehouses and export industries, in fact allowed Singapore to expand its export sector. Seen from these perspectives, trade arguably acts as an engine of growth as it enables both AD and AS to increase faster than under autarky, and therefore possibly contributes to a country’s long run sustained economic growth.

Second, accompanying the development of merchandise trade would be the development of services like shipping and airfreight, air travel, banking and finance, and tourism. With time, a developing economy experiences structural change and becomes less dependent on merchandise trade and manufacturing, instead diversifying into services, thus becoming more like a developed economy. For instance, countries like Singapore have developed from a third world to a first world country by experiencing structural change from international trade. Therefore, governments like China should also pursue a policy of free trade to benefit from economic diversification, maturation, and structural change, which could arguably ameliorate the impacts of recession. 

In conclusion, while protectionism can be politically expedient and may even ameliorate unemployment – both demand-deficient and structural unemployment – in the short run, it should not be used as an active policy to address recessions. This is because of the limitations of protectionism as well as the foregone benefits of international trade as an engine of growth that can also provide fundamental structural change to the economy, which would put it in good stead when the world economy recovers. Alternatively, large economies like China could also encourage local, domestic demand through the use of expansionary monetary and fiscal policies, and that could drive their economic growth during periods of recession, because they have the option to depend on domestic demand, whereas smaller and more open economies like Singapore would have to depend on international trade and globalisation to drive their economies. Thus, in the final analysis, the policy options taken to address the problems really depend on the countries involved, but to a large extent international trade is a much better policy than protectionism.

JC Economics Essays: This economics essay is a sample answer to an adapted economics question from the H2 Economics A Level paper, November 2013. The response was co-written by two economics lecturers for a tutorial class, in order to teach about protectionism and international trade for the A levels examination. However, this particular economics essay is only one possible response to the question - what could be done differently? Furthermore, how would you improve upon this answer, what real world examples could you use to buttress your arguments, and what can you do to improve this essay? Remember to think through the answers and how you can make economics arguments better. Thanks for reading and cheers. 

Globalisation and international trade have opened up new opportunities in the world. While a globalised international, world economy brings great benefits to the US economy by opening up new markets for American exports, it has subjected American companies and their workers to unfair overseas competition, which justifies protectionism for these affected industries. [25]

What is globalisation? Globalisation refers to the increasing integration and interdependence of the world’s economies arising from increased trade and greater international mobility of factors like capital, labour and enterprise. There have been a lot of benefits arising from globalisation. Globalisation has benefited the American economy vastly as it has enabled ordinary Americans to enjoy greater consumption possibilities and the engine of growth of the world's most powerful economy. However, it can be argued in a sense that the opening of new markets has also subjected American firms and workers to unfair foreign anti-competitive practices like dumping of cheap, low cost goods, and loss of jobs in the secondary sector of the American economy. 

Comparative advantage is the main theory for international trade. The law of comparative advantage states that a country is able to enjoy higher consumption levels if it was to specialize goods in which it has comparative advantage in, and trade for other goods in which it has a comparative disadvantage in. 

[Insert diagram on production possibilities of USA and Mexico]

Trade enables the USA to consume at any point along its consumption possibilities curve, which is beyond its own PPC. At the same time, Mexico also benefits from international trade. Therefore, both countries are able to consume more goods and services. Hence, it can be seen that when the opportunity costs of producing different goods differ between 2 countries, specialization and trade according to comparative advantage is beneficial to both countries. As such, increased exports to new markets would enable USA to have higher consumption possibilities as compared to a situation of autarky. 

[Insert diagram on AD and AS increasing]

Increased exports also allow full utilization of resources, which increases both AD and AS. Increased exports to new markets allow USA to overcome their domestic demand constraints by giving them access to larger world markets. With additional demand coming from exports, greater utilization of otherwise unemployed resources, output, income and employment. Since AD = C + I + G + (X – M), AD shifts out and real output increases, but price level remains unchanged. Rising export demand further stimulates investments, causing the AS to shift to the right in the long run, resulting in greater output and a lower price level, hence ensuring long run, sustained economic growth in the economy.

However, on the other hand, the globalized economy has also subjected American companies and workers to unfair foreign anti-competitive practices like dumping, which refers to the situation where foreign imports are sold below cost because foreign firms are trying to drive out domestic firms to gain market power. This is a situation that seems somewhat unfair to developed economies.

Also, labour unions in developed economies continuously argue that imports from developing countries are cheap because they artificially keep costs down by subjecting their workers to ‘sweatshop’ like work environments and by paying them depressed wages.

Thus, to curb this problem of unfair overseas competition, many in the USA lobby for countervailing duties (i.e. import tariffs) to be imposed to raise import prices so that they are more in line with prices of locally produced goods. This is known as protectionism, defined as the act of imposing economic policies aimed at restricting trade between countries, designed primarily to protect domestic producers and workers from foreign competition. Methods of protectionism include import tariffs, import quotas, subsidies, voluntary export restraints (VER), foreign exchange restrictions, physical barriers to entry, and technical barriers to entry.

However, on the other hand, protectionism results in greater allocative inefficiency as domestic firms have less drive to improve operating efficiencies and minimize costs. Also, protectionism results in a ‘beggar thy neighbour’ effect where exports, output and income of its trading partners are reduced, which then curbs exports, output and employment of the former. All these indirectly harm American consumers and the American economy in general. 

On top of the costs of protectionism, there are actually benefits to be reaped from the competition from imports. Firstly, competition from foreign imports forces local producers to innovate, cut costs and improve product quality. Local consumers thus enable enjoy lower prices and higher product quality form both imports and domestically produced goods, thus putting the majority of the Americans at an advantage, whereas protectionism only benefits the producers. Secondly, countries may be unable to produce some goods domestically because of the lack of key resources. Importing such goods will thus widen consumer choice. Product variety is also increased when intra-industry trade occurs as consumers get to enjoy not only domestic versions but also imported version of a given type of good, thus benefiting the majority of the Americans again. 

In conclusion, while one must admit that the globalized economy had brought about great benefits to the US economy by opening up new markets for US exports, the overseas competition faced by the American companies and workers may not be unfair. In view of the cheap labour argument, the fact that in developing countries, labour is in abundant and thus these countries will have a comparative advantage in producing labour intensive goods, which is why imports from these countries are cheaper. Therefore, this renders protectionism unjustified as protecting these industries would be to produce a good that it has a comparative disadvantage in. Therefore, this comprises the consumption levels of the country, and gradually greater allocative inefficiency as domestic firms become even more productively inefficient because they have less need to improve operating efficiencies. Hence, protectionism may not be justified in the USA.

JC Economics Essays - H1, H2, H3 Economics essays - tutor's comments: This economics essay on globalisation, international trade, and the US economy is quite interesting, well written, crafted under timed conditions, and seems to address the economics question posed rather well to a large extent. There are some developed economic theories and the appropriate essay techniques, such as signposting, are used. The answer is rather clear and generally well developed, and could quite possibly gain a rather good mark from the examiners. The question is: how can this economics essay be made better? The overall quality of the essay answer could be much higher, but the question is - how can that be achieved under examination conditions, when time is scarce? What should have been done, and what should have been done better? Also, what other economic theories should have been brought in to make the answer more complete? Think about how you could write this essay better, and sharpen it further, and stretch the grade with models, theories, and examples. Perhaps this economics paper could have used more examples and empirical data to show good Economics knowledge and materials. 

“Protectionism is better than free trade.” Discuss the validity of this statement. [25]

Adapted from an actual H2 'A' Level Economics Examination

Introduction to Protectionism

What is protectionism? Protectionism is the government policy of imposing economic policies aimed at restricting international trade between countries, designed to protect domestic producers and workers from foreign competition brought about by trade. International trade, on the other hand, is the free and competitive exchange of goods and services across international boundaries. 

There are many methods of protectionism, namely, import tariffs, import quotas, subsidies, voluntary export restraints, foreign exchange restrictions, physical barriers such as making it difficult to clear unnecessary and bureaucratic custom checks and technical barriers such as differences in technical and safety standards to justify the prevention of foreign goods from being imported. Import tariffs are either levied as a fixed amount of charge per unit or levied as a fraction of the value of a unit. Thus, tariffs artificially raise import prices and reduce the quantity demanded of imports. 

What Economics diagram should be applied here? Based on the description below, what is the likely diagram here?

By examining the concept of protectionism through import tariffs, assuming that the country is a price taker as it is too small to affect world markets and prices, a small country can import as much as it wants at world price, Pw. Sw is the supply of imports and is infinitely price elastic at Pw. At Pw, domestic production is at Q1 while domestic consumption is at Q4. Thus, there is a shortage, DC, is solved by importing the goods to satisfy consumption. When there is a tariff on imports, the world supply curve shifts upwards from Sw to SW+t, with the area between Sw and SW+t being the tariff. Domestic production has now increased from Q1 to Q2 while domestic consumption has fallen from Q4 to Q3. The volume of imports has shrunk from Q1Q4 to Q2Q3. Before the tariff, consumer surplus was ACPw and producers’ surplus at ODPw.  The presence of the tariff caused the consumers’ surplus to fall from ACPw to ABPw. Therefore there is a welfare loss, a deadweight loss in area (2+4). This shows that protectionism results in a loss in welfare to society. [Tutor's Note: this is a very detailed analysis of a diagram. Always try to give analysis of diagrams that you draw in an examination.]

The Theory of Comparative Advantage

International trade operates on the basis of the theory of comparative advantage, where a country produces a good that it can produce at a lower opportunity cost compared to other countries, given its factor endowments. Here, it is assumed that the factors of production are perfectly immobile between countries and from one sector to another within countries as well as that the transportation costs of goods and services are negligible. Referring to figure 2, we use a hypothetical example between USA and Mexico’s comparative advantage. 

Figure 2 refers to two different economies, both depicting differently shaped PPCs (Production Possibilities Frontiers). How would you draw this Economics diagram?

Thus, international trade, as can be seen from the diagram, specifically by the theory of comparative advantage, enables consumers to enjoy higher consumption possibilities. 

Benefits of International Free Trade

Other benefits of international or free trade include lower prices and better product quality, greater product variety, developing countries being able to enjoy technical transfers, trade being an engine of growth for an economy and providing economic diversification. 

Firstly, countries that trade freely will enable domestic firms to face competition from foreign imports. If it is the case of intra-industry trade, it will pressure domestic firms to become more efficient and innovate new methods of production to increase efficiency, reduce cost of production and ultimately pass down the lower cost to consumers in the form of lower prices as well as better quality products from innovation in a bid to differentiate their products from rival foreign imports. If it is a case of inter-industry trade, it enables consumers to enjoy goods that the country are enable to produce due to the lack of factors of production required to produce the particular product, thus increasing product variety. For example, in Singapore, due to the tropical climate, we are not able to produce apples but owing to free trade, we are able to import apples from other temperate countries like New Zealand and USA and as a result, able to enjoy greater product variety, i.e.: enjoy a wider range of fruits, ranging from not only tropical fruits but also fruits grown in temperate climate.

Free Trade is also an engine of growth for the country. Developed and small economies like Singapore lack sufficient domestic market. Trade then exposes Singapore firms to a larger world market and enable us to fully utilise resources that are otherwise unemployed. This in turn increases output, income and employment, shifting both the AD and AS outwards. 

Limitations of International Trade

However, while free trade and specialisation may seem ideal, there are also some limitations. 

Free trade using comparative advantage may mean that in the event firms in other countries become more efficient at producing the product the first country has as a comparative advantage, the first country will become less competitive and lose its comparative advantage, which may lead to an economic crisis for the country since the country is largely dependent on the trade of this particular good. It makes the situation worse since the country is only adept at producing the particular product at a lower opportunity cost compared to other country, its initial focus on producing this good would mean that most of its workers are only trained in producing this good, leading to a case of structural unemployment when the country loses its comparative advantage. This has a somewhat similar result when the country is faced with supply problems from its sole supplier who specialise in supplying the raw materials.  This not only affect the livelihood of the people, as well as cost-push inflation due to a spike in prices of goods stemming from shortage of raw materials to manufacture the goods.  Trade restrictions due to natural disasters and war could also affect a country that depends on international trade via comparative advantage theory and thus is not independent. 

In this light, protectionism may seem like a better solution despite it causing a welfare loss as explained earlier in the tariff diagram. As countries need to protect its strategic industries and be self-sufficient to prevent the above situation from occurring and thus debilitating the country’s economic progress. Some examples are the agriculture and defence related industries. 

Furthermore, protectionism enables the country to protect domestic infant industry to better develop the economy of the country in future. New domestic industries have the potential to develop a comparative advantage in a certain product. However, due to high start up costs and a lack of economies of scale due to smaller scale of production compared to giant foreign firms, prices of the domestic goods are less price competitive compared to foreign imports. Thus, protection enables infant industries to grow and become internationally competitive in future before the protectionist measures are taken away. Nevertheless, such an argument may not be foolproof because firstly, it is difficult to identify the correct new industries which have potential to develop a comparative advantage and also politically difficult for the government to remove the protectionist measure from an infant industry which have grown up. Also, with protectionist measures, it reduces the domestic firms’ incentive to be efficient and respond to consumers demand or to reduce average costs, thus, these infant industry may never develop and build a comparative advantage in the world market because the firms are assured of being protected by the government if it does not grow.  For example, Malaysia protects its national car firm, Proton. It has been under protection from the Malaysia government and has not improved in technology unlike other Japanese car firms. 

Protection of declining industries can be another reason for protectionism as stated earlier how a country could lose its comparative advantage and be entrapped in serious structural unemployment as workers are only equipped with skills to manufacture to previous product that used to be a comparative advantage to the country. This gives time for workers to learn a new skill and find a new job in a new industry, mitigating structural unemployment. However, critics say that such protection is not perfectly viable because overtime, these declining industries are protected for too long and never change and adjust, creating a burden to the country’s economy as well as adversely affect the standard of living of the consumers as they are denied access to cheaper foreign imports. For example, Singapore used to be labour intensive but owing to the decline of the primary and manufacturing sector in Singapore, it quickly decline, go through training and move into the tertiary industry quickly without protectionist measures. 

Other reasons for protectionism includes protection from unfair foreign competition and raising employment in domestic firms and improving trade position of the country. 

Evaluation/ Conclusion

In conclusion, although both protectionism and free trade and specialisation has both its pros and cons, free trade is ultimately better because protectionism only serves as a temporary measure to problems caused by free trade , with many arguments for protectionism debatable in the long run. Welfare losses stemming from protectionism are also borne by consumers as consumers would have benefited from increased trade and suffer from retaliation if protectionist measures were imposed. Instead, countries should take a pro-trade stance and use macroeconomic policies like supply-side policies, improving education and retraining, better infrastructure to develop infant industries and strategic industries as well as ensure smooth transition out from structural labour rigidity from declining sectors.     

JC ECONOMICS ESSAYS: Economics tutor's comments: A more direct approach to this economics question on protectionsim would be to directly tackle the statement: first, in what cases would protectionism be better than free trade? Then, second, write the anti-thesis: how is free trade better? Finally, conclude with an evaluative statement with a justification for the viewpoint. However, this economics essay does a more exploratory and discussion-based kind of approach, which makes for an interesting reading, but may not be the most time effective or efficient strategy in an Economics examination. How would you rearrange these economics content and materials to make the essay address the question more directly, clearly, and efficiently? As a quick reminder, also remember to draw relevant economics diagrams and also to think of how you could make the essay better. What can you learn from the strengths of this economics paper, in a similar vein? Do think through the essay as you read and reflect on it. Thanks for reading and cheers!