Tariff Protection, Import Substitution, and Investment Efficiency. Reply

Ronald Soligo and Joseph Stern

The Pakistan Development Review, 1966, vol. 6, issue 1, 110-119

Abstract: The essence of Papanek's comments are that the methodology of our study has biased our results and hence that our conclusions must be qualified. As pointed out by Papanek the issues raised in our paper are of crucial importance to policy and planning decisions in Pakistan and for this reason much more work needs to be done before one can determine what a rational policy for industrial development would be. However, we do not believe that the issues raised by Papanek would significantly affect our results. We do not mean to imply that our results are not open to substantial qualifications but we do feel that the methodological questions raised by Papanek are not the relevant ones.

Date: 1966
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.pide.org.pk/pdf/PDR/1966/Volume1/110-119.pdf (application/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:pid:journl:v:6:y:1966:i:1:p:110-119

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The Pakistan Development Review from Pakistan Institute of Development Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Khurram Iqbal ().