Read Now Policy and Theory of International Economics RTF
Traditionally, intermediate-level international economics texts seem to fall into oneof two categories. Some are written for students who may one day continue on in aneconomics PhD program. These texts develop advanced general equilibrium modelsand use sophisticated mathematics. However, these texts are also very difficult forthe average, non-PhD-bound student to understand. Other intermediate texts arewritten for noneconomics majors who may take only a few economics courses intheir program. These texts present descriptive information about the world andonly the bare basics about how economic models are used to describe that world.This text strives to reach a median between these two approaches. First, I believethat students need to learn the theory and models to understand how economistsunderstand the world. I also think these ideas are accessible to most students if theyare explained thoroughly. This text presents numerous models in some detail, notby employing advanced mathematics, but rather by walking students through adetailed description of how a model’s assumptions influence its conclusions.Second, and perhaps more important, students must learn how the models connectwith the real world. I believe that theory is done primarily to guide policy. We dopositive economics to help answer the normative questions; for example, whatshould a country do about its trade policy or its exchange rate policy? The resultsfrom models give us insights that help us answer these questions. Thus this textstrives to explain why each model is interesting by connecting its results to someaspect of a current policy issue. A prime example is found in Chapter 11 "Evaluatingthe Controversy between Free Trade and Protectionism" of this book, whichaddresses the age-old question of whether countries should choose free trade orsome type of selected protection. The chapter demonstrates how the results of thevarious models presented throughout the text contribute to our understanding ofthis long-standing debate.
