The visualization here is one of the key charts from their paper.
Additionally, they found that claims for unemployment and healthcare benefits also increased in more trade-exposed labor markets. In this paper, Autor and coauthors looked at how local labor markets changed in the parts of the country most exposed to Chinese competition, and they found that rising exposure increased unemployment, lowered labor force participation, and reduced wages.
The most famous study looking at this question is Autor, Dorn and Hanson (2013): “The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States”. Studies measuring the distribution of welfare gains, across all the main relevant welfare channels are only beginning to emerge. This fails to consider welfare gains from increased product variety and obscures complicated distributional issues, such as the fact that poor and rich individuals consume different baskets so they benefit differently from changes in relative prices. Most studies approximate the impact of trade on welfare by looking at how much wages can buy, using as reference the changing prices of a fixed basket of goods. Trade also affects consumer prices not just wages.Aggregating across regions and firms gives us a different picture. The negative effects of trade on earnings tend to be concentrated in specific areas and industries.Globalization impacts the standard of living of different types of workers to different degrees within countries, in all countries. Narratives that focus on winning and losing countries miss the point.These studies are important and informative, but there are some nuances to keep in mind. Several academic studies have shown that trade liberalization often has a negative impact on wages and employment for specific groups of people – from industry workers in the US to farmers in India.
0 kommentar(er)
