Should China formulate its development strategy according to the theory of comparative advantage?

It is an inevitable choice to formulate a development strategy according to comparative advantage, but it is necessary to understand that comparative advantage is also a time range, and with the development of economy and society, comparative advantage is constantly changing, and it can change in the opposite direction.

Damn, this still needs to be thought, we must go according to comparative advantages, you look at our Chinese manufacturing industry rampant in the world, isn't it just relying on our large number of labor-intensive, do you say that we can compare with the United States with high-tech, can we compare with Japan with resource utilization, China's aerospace industry, back then, because of whether to take the road of space shuttle or rocket, specifically discussed, and finally felt that we still have an advantage in rockets, so we did not engage in space shuttles.

Comparative advantageProposed by:David Ricardo

David Ricardo in his masterpiece "Principles of Political Economy and Taxation".

The theory of comparative cost (later known as the "theory of comparative advantage") was proposed. The theory of comparative advantage holds that the basis of international ** is the relative difference in production technology (rather than absolute difference) and the resulting difference in relative costs.

In accordance with the principle of "choosing the greater of the two advantages and the lesser of the two disadvantages," each country should concentrate on producing and exporting products in which it has a "comparative advantage" and import products in which it has a "comparative disadvantage." The theory of comparative advantage explains the basis of production and the gains on a more general basis, greatly developing the theory of absolute advantage.

The difference between the theory of national competitive advantage and the theory of comparative advantage is that the theoretical base points are different, the objectives are different, and the development paths are different.

There are two extreme views on the relationship between the theory of comparative advantage and the theory of competitive advantage. One view is that the theory of comparative advantage and the theory of competitive advantage are incompatible, and that one or the other can only be chosen. Another view is that there is no essential difference between the theory of comparative advantage and the theory of competitive advantage, but that different terms are used.

The above views are one-sided, and the theory of comparative advantage and the theory of competitive advantage belong to the two disciplines of economics and management, respectively, which are relatively independent and interrelated. The two theories are relatively independent Porter made it clear that his field of study is management rather than economics, and he positions himself as a management scientist rather than an economist.

The essential difference between economics and management is that economics is committed to explaining economic phenomena and revealing economic laws, and is a discipline that understands the world. Management is a discipline that aims to transform the world by providing ways and means to achieve the desired economic ends. Although economics and management are intertwined, there are still clear boundaries.

The basis point of the theory of comparative advantage is the exchange and trade rollover section, and the basis point of the theory of competitive advantage is competition. Although the emergence and development of the theory of comparative advantage preceded the theory of competitive advantage, there is no strict sequential relationship between the two. Porter mentioned the application of the theory of comparative advantage to the problem of competitiveness.

However, instead of establishing a competitive advantage theory based on the theory of comparative advantage, a systematic study of the competitiveness of locations rooted in the business environment that is not covered by the theory of comparative advantage is systematically studied.

The theory of comparative advantage was proposed by David Ricardo.

David Ricardo, in his masterpiece "Principles of Political Economy and Taxation", proposed the theory of comparative cost (later known as the "theory of comparative advantage").

There are pros and cons to developing one's own economy according to the theory of comparative advantage.

Pros: 1. The use of domestic technology, resources and even labor advantages to develop industries can effectively improve labor productivity;

2. Effectively reduce the labor time of commodities, so as to reduce the price level in the world;

3. The surplus of foreign exchange earned by exports increased.

Disadvantages: 1. It is easy to cause extravagance and waste of resources;

2. Excessive development of industries with comparative advantages is easy to shake basic industries, such as agriculture and basic manufacturing;

3. Excessive development of industries with comparative advantages is easy to cause a single industry, a biased structural structure, and a weakened ability to resist economic risks.

Developing countries can easily achieve rapid GDP growth by using the theory of comparative advantage; However, weak and excessive development may lead to active or passive adjustment of the industrial structure, and it is easy to repeat the old path of Britain and Japan.

The theory of comparative advantage proposed the practice of training: David Ricardo.

David Ricardo, in his essay "Principles of Political Economy and Taxation", proposed the theory of comparative cost (later known as the "theory of comparative advantage").