TEL  Vol.4 No.1 , February 2014
Transaction Cost, Specialization and Division of Labor
—A General Equilibrium Analysis of Entrepreneurship under Globalization
Author(s) Ke Li*
ABSTRACT

This paper develops a Walrasian general equilibrium model based on transaction cost and specialization to investigate the evolution and role of entrepreneurship in a competitive market under globalization. The implication of our model is straightforward that if the entrepreneurship in a competitive market under globalization is efficient, it will ensure the network and effects of division of labor can be fully exploited when the gains from the division of labor outweigh the costs of exchange between individuals of different specialization patterns with the different fixed learning costs. Hence, the entrepreneurship service in a competitive market under globalization can promote aggregate productivity by enlarging the scope for trading off network effects of the division of labor on aggregate productivity against transaction costs. To business practitioners, this model suggests that the entrepreneurship service is a key element of business viability during which a major transition took place in human activity. Besides, the improvement of the level of globalization and the general transaction efficiency coefficient will increase the level of division of labor and the per capita real income level of participants.


Cite this paper
K. Li, "Transaction Cost, Specialization and Division of Labor
—A General Equilibrium Analysis of Entrepreneurship under Globalization," Theoretical Economics Letters, Vol. 4 No. 1, 2014, pp. 34-42. doi: 10.4236/tel.2014.41006.
References
[1]   B. A. McDaniel, “Entrepreneurship and Innovation: An Economic Approach,” M. E. Sharpe, New York, 2002.

[2]   R. Cantillon, “Essay on the Nature of Trade,” Macmillan, London, 1755, Reprinted in 1931.

[3]   M. Casson, “Entrepreneur,” In: J. Eatwell, M. Milgate and P. Newman, Eds., The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, Macmillan, London, 1987, pp. 151-153.

[4]   R. F. Hébert and A. N. Link, “The Entrepreneur: Mainstream Views and Radical Critiques,” 2nd Edition, Praeger, New York, 1988.

[5]   J. B. Say, “A Treatise on Political Economy; or the Production, Distribution, and Consumption of Wealth,” 6th Edition), Augustus M. Kelley, New York, 1803, Reprinted in 1964.

[6]   A. Marshall, “Principles of Economics,” 8th Edition, Macmillan, New York, 1920, Reprinted in 1949.

[7]   C. Menger, “Principles of Economics,” Free Press, Illinois, 1871, Reprinted in 1950.

[8]   J. A. Schumpeter, “The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle,” Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1911.

[9]   J. A. Schumpeter, “The Theory of Business Enterprise,” Charles Scibner’s Sons, New York, 1912.

[10]   I. M. Kirzner, “The Primacy of Entrepreneurial Discovery,” In: I. M. Kirzner, Eds., The Prime Mover of Progress (Reading 23), Institute of Economic Affairs, London, 1980, pp. 3-30.

[11]   R. N. Langlois, “Risk and Uncertainty,” In: P. J. Boettke, Ed., The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics, Edward Elgar, Aldershot, 1994, pp. 118-122.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9780857934680.00026

[12]   L. V. Mises, “Human Action: A Treatise on Economics,” Yale University Press, New Haven, 1949.

[13]   I. M. Kirzner, “Competition and Entrepreneurship,” University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973.

[14]   I. M. Kirzner, “Creativity and/or Alertness: A Reconsideration of the Schumpeterian entrepreneur,” Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 11, No. 1-2, 1999, pp. 5-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007719905868

[15]   I. M. Kirzner, “Entrepreneurship,” In: P. J. Boettke, Eds., The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics, Edward Elgar, Aldershot, 1994, pp. 103-110.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9780857934680.00024

[16]   B. A. McDaniel, “Institutional Destruction of Entrepreneurship through Capitalist Transformation,” Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2003, pp. 495-501.

[17]   W. J. Baumol, “Entrepreneurship, Management and the Structure of Payoffs,” The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1993.

[18]   P. Devine, “The Institutional Context of Entrepreneurial Activity,” In: F. Adaman and P. Devine, Eds., Economy and Society: Money, Capitalism and Transition, Black Rose Books, Montreal, 2002, pp. 440-454.

[19]   W. A. Waters, “The Social Economics of Joseph A. Schumpeter,” Review of Social Economics, Vol. 52, No. 4, 1994, pp. 256-265.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/758523323

[20]   W. I. Mondal, “Micro-Credit and Micro-Entrepreneurship,” Academic Press and Publications, Ltd., Dhaka, 2002.

[21]   K. Thanawola, “Schumpeter’s Theory of Economic Development and Development Economics,” Review of Social Economy, Vol. 211, No. 4, 1994, pp. 361-362.

[22]   X. K. Yang, “Economics: New Classical versus Neoclassical Frameworks,” Blackwell, Cambridge, 2001.

[23]   K. Li and S. T. Yao, “A Mixed Nash-Walrasian Equilibrium Model with Endogenous Stealing and Endogenous Specialization,” Pacific Economic Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2004, pp. 347-356.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0106.2004.00254.x

[24]   K. Li, C. N. Chu, D. F. Hung, C. C. Chang and S. L. Li, “Industrial Cluster, Network and Production Value-Chain: A New Framework for Industrial Development Based on Specialization and Division of Labour,” Pacific Economic Review, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2010, pp. 596-619.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0106.2010.00528.x

[25]   A. Young, “Increasing Returns and Economic Progress,” The Economic Journal, Vol. 38, No. 152, 1928, pp. 527 542.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2224097

 
 
Top