World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Infant industry argument

Article Id: WHEBN0001859820
Reproduction Date:

Title: Infant industry argument  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Free trade debate, Import substitution industrialization, Jobless recovery, Trade creation, Arguments
Collection: Arguments, Economic Ideologies, Protectionism
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Publication
Date:
 

Infant industry argument

Alexander Hamilton first codified the infant industry argument.

The infant industry argument is an economic rationale for trade protectionism. The core of the argument is that nascent industries often do not have the economies of scale that their older competitors from other countries may have, and thus need to be protected until they can attain similar economies of scale. The argument was first fully articulated by Alexander Hamilton in his 1790 Report on Manufactures, was systematically developed by Daniel Raymond,[1] and was later picked up by Friedrich List in his 1841 work The National System of Political Economy, following his exposure to the idea during his residence in the United States in the 1820s.[1]

Many countries have successfully industrialized behind tariff barriers. For example, from 1816 through 1945, tariffs in the USA were among the highest in the world.[1] According to Ha-Joon Chang, "Almost all of today’s rich countries used tariff protection and subsidies to develop their industries."[2]

Despite this, infant industry protection is controversial as a policy recommendation. As with the other economic rationales for protectionism, it is often abused by rent seeking interests. Even when infant industry protection is well–intentioned, it is difficult for governments to know which industries they should protect; "infant" industries may never "grow up" relative to "adult" foreign competitors. For example, during the 1980s Brazil enforced strict controls on the import of foreign computers in an effort to nurture its own "infant" computer industry. This industry never matured; the technological gap between Brazil and the rest of the world actually widened, while the protected industries merely copied low-end foreign computers and sold them at inflated prices.[3] In addition, countries that put up barriers to imports will often face retaliatory barriers to their exports, potentially hurting the same industries that infant industry protection is intended to help.

Ernesto Zedillo, in his 2000 report to the UN Secretary-General, recommended "Legitimising limited, time-bound protection for certain industries by countries in the early stages of industrialisation," arguing that "However misguided the old model of blanket protection intended to nurture import substitute industries, it would be a mistake to go to the other extreme and deny developing countries the opportunity of actively nurturing the development of an industrial sector."[4]

References

  1. ^ a b c Chang, Ha-Joon. "Kicking Away the Ladder: How the Economic and Intellectual Histories of Capitalism Have Been Re-Written to Justify Neo-Liberal Capitalism". Post-Autistic Economics Review. 4 September 2002: Issue 15, Article 3. Retrieved on 8 October 2008.
  2. ^ Chang, Ha-Joon (2002.) Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. London: Anthem Press.
  3. ^ Luzio, Eduardo (1996.) The microcomputer industry in Brazil: the case of a protected high-technology industry. Santa Barbara: Greenwood Publishing.
  4. ^ Zedillo, Ernesto (2000.) Technical Report of the High-Level Panel on Financing for Development. New York: United Nations.
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 


Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.