Abstract
It is not uncommon in the natural sciences for theory to precede the technical capacity of mankind to sense, measure and verify or refute the postulates involved. In contrast, in the social sciences, experience is often the mother of theory, which may lag several decades behind the emergence of the social phenomena it purports to explain. When theory becomes unrelated to such phenomena, not only its direct policy usefulness, but also its overall conceptual relevance are brought into question. For example, in the inter-war period, the theory of international trade (based on the Heckscher-Ohlin model and later incorporations of the Samuelson analysis) was more preoccupied with how the world should behave if certain very restrictive conditions were present, than with the way in which goods, services and factors of production were exchanged internationally.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For a succinct description of the relevance and implications of trade and location theories in international business involvement, see J.H. Dunning, ‘Trade, Location of Economic Activity and the MNE: A Search for an Eclectic Approach’ in B. Ohlin et al. (eds.), The International Allocation of Economic Activity (London: Macmillan, 1977) p. 395.
G. K. Helleiner, ‘Intra-firm Trade and the Developing Countries: Patterns, Trends and Data Problems’, paper presented in the UNCTAD/IDS conference on Trade and Development, Sussex University (November 1977).
The most comprehensive review of existing empirical studies, particularly the path-breaking research of G. K. Helleiner in this area, has recently been undertaken by R. Murray. See G. K. Helleiner and R. Lavergne, ‘Intra-firm Trade & Industrial Exports to the United States’, mimeo, Queen Elizabeth House, Oxford (1979).
See R. Murray, ‘Transfer Pricing, Multinationals and the State’, mimeo, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex (1979), especially pp. 27–44.
For the effect of ‘lead or lag’ practices in related party transactions on the balance of payment of the Federal Republic of Germany, see M. Edwardes-Ker, International Tax Strategy (Dublin: In Depth Publishing, 1974).
United States Department of Treasury, ‘Summary Study of International Cases Involving Section 482 of the Internal Revenue Code’ (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1973).
This part is based on ideas originating from the seminal work of S. Hymer, particularly those included in S. Hymer, ‘The Multinational Corporation and the Law of Uneven Development’ in Ch. Kindleberger, The International Corporation (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1969) pp. 113–40.
J. Robinson, The New Mercantilism, Cambridge University Press, 1966.
For an equivalent discussion on the monopoly implications of product diversification and cross-subsidisation, see J. Houssiaux, Les Pouvoirs de Monopoles (Paris: Sizey, 1958).
For machinery markets, see Charles Cooper and Philip Maxwell, ‘Machinery Suppliers and the Transfer of Technology to Latin America: A View of “Packaging” and “Learning by Doing”’, mimeo, Science Policy Research Unit, Sussex University (1976).
F. Pazos, ‘The Role of International Movements of Private Capital in Promoting Development’, in S. H. Adler (ed.), Capital Movements & Economic Development (1967).
For a description of the Andean Pact’s attempts to introduce technological de-packaging policies in their dealing with transnationals and other technology suppliers, see IDRC-JUNAC, Technology Policy & Economic Development, IDRC-061e (Ottawa, 1976).
See Dorfman, Samuelson & Solow, Linear Programming & Economic Analysis (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc, 1958).
See S. M. Robbins and R. B. Stobaugh, Money in the International Enterprise: A Study of Financial Policy (London: Longman, 1973), and
C. V. Vaitsos, Intercountry Income Distribution & Transnational Enterprises (Oxford University Press, 1974).
See United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Special Survey of U.S. Multinational Companies, 1970, (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1976).
See M. Holthus et al., Die Auslandstaetigket der Deutschen Multinationalen Unternehmen, HWWA-Institut, report no. 31 (Hamburg, 1974).
See A. O. Hirschman, The Strategy of Economic Development (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1958).
G. Myrdal, Economic Theory & Underdeveloped Regions, 1957.
See UNCTAD, ‘Dominant Positions of Market Power of Transnational Corporations, Use of the Transfer Pricing Mechanism’, UNCTAD/ST/UD/6 (Geneva: UNCTAD, 1977).
See J. J. Arpan, International Intercorporate Pricing: Non-American Systems and Views (New York: Praeger, 1972) p. 7.
Also see Business International, Setting Intercorporate Pricing Policies (New York: Business International, 1973).
For empirical work on the concentration of R&D expenditures by the TNEs, see K. Pavitt ‘The Multinational Enterprise and the Transfer of Technology’, in E. H. Dunning (ed.), The Multinational Enterprise (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971) and the various OECD sectoral studies on Technology Gaps. For top management, see K. Simmonds, ‘Multinational? Well not Quite’, Columbia Journal of World Business (New York, 1966), and
L. G. Franko, ‘Who Manages the Multinational Enterprise’, mimeo. (Geneva: Centre d’Etudes Industrielles, 1973).
See F. E. Cardoso, ‘The Contradiction of associated development’, reprinted in ‘Current theses on Latin American development and dependency: a critique’, paper presented in the III Scandinavian Research Conference on Latin America (Bergen, June 1976).
O. Sunkel, ‘Transnational capitalism and national disintegration in Latin America’, Social and Economic Studies, vol. 22, no. 1 (1973) pp. 132–76.
For a quantitative comparison between TNE and non-TNE characteristics and motivations, see J. Vaupel ‘Characteristics and Motivations of the U.S. Corporations which manufacture abroad’, paper presented at the Atlantic Institute (Paris, June 1971).
See A. P. Jacquemin and H. W. de Jong, European Industrial Organization (London: Macmillan Press, 1977).
See United Nations Center on Transnational Corporations, Transnational Corporations in World Development: A Re-examination, E/C. 10/38 (New York: United Nations, 1978).
See K. J. Arrow, ‘Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention’, in Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Report of the National Bureau of Economic Research (Princeton University Press, 1962) pp. 609–25.
See S. P. Magee, ‘Information and the Multinational Corporation: An Appropriability Theory of Direct Foreign Investment’, in J. N. Bhagworti (ed.), The New International Economic Order (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1977).
See M. E. Porter and A. M. Spence, ‘Vertical Integration and Different Inputs’, Warwick Economic Research Papers (Nov 1977).
For various references to the literature on vertical integration, see B. S. Yamey, Economics of Industrial Structure (Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Modern Economics Readings, 1973).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1980 Dudley Seers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vaitsos, C. (1980). Corporate Integration in World Production and Trade. In: Seers, D., Vaitsos, C. (eds) Integration and Unequal Development. Studies in the Integration of Western Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-05538-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-05538-8_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-05540-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-05538-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)