|
on Central and South America |
|
Issue of 2013‒12‒06
four papers chosen by |
| By: | Lasse Steiner; Bruno S. Frey; Magnus Resch |
| Abstract: | This paper analysis the global distribution of art collections and collectors´ biases with respect to the origin of artworks. Employing a unique dataset we find that the greatest number of private art collections are located in Europe, North America and Asia. There are relatively few collections in Latin America and Africa. The artists whose oeuvres dominate the markets for collected art come from North America, followed by Asian and European artists. The home bias in private art collections turns out to be strong in all continents and countries. It is highest for Asian and African collections and smaller for European and North American collections. The home bias can partly be accounted for by high export and import restrictions. |
| Keywords: | Art collection, home bias, trade restrictions, artists |
| JEL: | Z11 F14 K20 |
| Date: | 2013–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zur:econwp:135&r=lam |
| By: | Benkovskis, Konstantins; Wörz, Julia |
| Abstract: | Building on the methodology pioneered by Feenstra (1994) and Broda and Weinstein (2006), we construct an export price index that adjusts for changes in the set of competitors (variety) and changes in non-price factors (quality in a broad sense) for nine emerging economies (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Turkey). The highly disaggregated dataset covers the period 1996?2011 and is based on the standardised 6-digit Harmonized System (HS). Our method highlights notable differences in non-price competitiveness across markets. China shows a huge gain in international competitiveness due to non-price factors. Similarly, Brazil, Chile, India and Turkey show discernible improvements in their competitive position when accounting for non-price factors. Oil exports account for strong improvement in Russia's non-price competitiveness, as well as the modest losses of competitiveness for Argentina and Indonesia. Mexico's competitiveness deteriorates prior to 2006 and improves afterwards. JEL Classification: C43, F12, F14, L15 |
| Keywords: | emerging countries, non-price competitiveness, quality, relative export price |
| Date: | 2013–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ecb:ecbwps:20131612&r=lam |
| By: | Pedro Herculano Guimarães Ferreira de Souza |
| Abstract: | O objetivo deste texto é investigar os efeitos das desigualdades regionais sobre a desigualdade interpessoal de renda domiciliar per capita no Brasil e comparar os mresultados com os encontrados nos Estados Unidos e no México. Cinco hipóteses são testadas a partir de decomposições aninhadas do índice de desigualdade GE(0) para diversos recortes geográficos. Os dados são provenientes dos censos demográficos dos três países. Os resultados sugerem que a maior parte da desigualdade de renda no Brasil, assim como nos Estados Unidos e no México, é local, entre vizinhos, não sendo captada nem mesmo por decomposições espaciais submunicipais. Dessa maneira, ainda que todos os municípios do Brasil tivessem exatamente a mesma renda per capita, a desigualdade total brasileira continuaria superior à observada nos Estados Unidos. No entanto, as desigualdades regionais não devem ser ignoradas, até porque são muito mais elevadas no Brasil e no México. A principal diferença entre estes países e os Estados Unidos está na existência de grandes regiões que possuem simultaneamente rendas médias muito inferiores e desigualdades internas muito superiores às demais regiões de cada país. A magnitude desses dois efeitos é semelhante, de modo que, para reduzir a desigualdade interpessoal de renda no Brasil, diminuir a desigualdade local no Norte/ Nordeste é tão importante quanto elevar a renda média nessa macrorregião agregada. This paper examines the effects of regional inequalities on the interpersonal distribution of household per capita income in Brazil, the United States and Mexico. Five hypotheses are tested through nested decompositions of the GE(0) inequality index applied to Census microdata for all three countries. The results suggest that income inequality is mostly local in Brazil as well as in the United States and Mexico, that is, it occurs among neighbors and thus remains unaccounted for even in municipality-level spatial decompositions. Income inequality in Brazil would still be higher than that of the United States even if it were possible to equalize the average incomes of all Brazilian municipalities. However, this does not mean that regional inequalities are of i. The versions in English of the abstracts of this series have not been edited by Ipea’s editorial department. As versões em língua inglesa das sinopses (abstracts) desta coleção não são objeto de revisão pelo Editorial do Ipea. no consequence to income inequality, as they are also much more pronounced in Brazil and Mexico. The main difference between these two countries and the United States lies in the existence of macro regions with lower average incomes and higher internal inequality than the rest of each country. Both effects are of similar magnitude, so that,in Brazil, lowering local inequality in the North/Northeast is as important as raising the average income of that region in order to reduce interpersonal income inequality. |
| Date: | 2013–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1897&r=lam |
| By: | Paula Bustos; Bruno Caprettini; Jacopo Ponticelli |
| Abstract: | We study the effects of the adoption of new agricultural technologies on structural transformation. To guide empirical work, we present a simple model where the effect of agricultural productivity on industrial development depends on the factor bias of technical change. We test the predictions of the model by studying the introduction of genetically engineered soybean seeds in Brazil, which had heterogeneous effects on agricultural productivity across areas with different soil and weather characteristics. We find that technical change in soy production was strongly labor saving and lead to industrial growth, as predicted by the model. |
| Keywords: | agricultural productivity, structural transformation, industrial development, labor saving technical change, genetically engineered soy |
| JEL: | F16 F43 Q16 |
| Date: | 2013–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bge:wpaper:736&r=lam |