Constructing a Myth that Ricardo Was the Father of the Ricardian Model of International Trade: A Reconsideration of Torrens f Principles of Comparative Advantage and Gain-from-trade

Taro Hisamatsu
Additional contact information
Taro Hisamatsu: Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University

No 1630, Discussion Papers from Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University

Abstract: Historians of economic thought have often pointed out that Ricardo fs famous England-Portugal model differs from the gRicardian model h presented in modern international economics textbooks. This paper argues that the erroneous belief that David Ricardo was the father of the Ricardian model might have arisen from Robert Torrens f own explanations of comparative advantage and his repeated claims. The principle of comparative advantage put forward by Torrens has much in common with the modern Ricardian model. In the early twentieth century, distinguished writers of international trade theory devoted their attention to a great controversy among famous economists in the authoritative The Economic Journal about who should be considered the true father of comparative advantage, Ricardo or Torrens, and concluded that Ricardo, in his text, proposed the same principles of comparative advantage as Torrens had presented.

Pages: 16 pages
Date: 2016-09
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-his, nep-hpe and nep-int
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.econ.kobe-u.ac.jp/RePEc/koe/wpaper/2016/1630.pdf

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:koe:wpaper:1630

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers from Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kimiaki Shirahama ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).