2 “England may be so circumstanced, that to produce the cloth may require the labour of 100 men for one year; and if she attempted to make the wine, it might require the labour of 120 men for the same time. . . . To produce the wine in Portugal, might require only the labour of 80 men for one year, and to produce the cloth in the same country, might require the labour of 90 men for the same time. It would therefore be advantageous for her to export wine in exchange for cloth. This exchange might even take place, notwithstanding that the commodity imported by Portugal could be produced there with less labour than in England.” David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, vol. 1 of The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, ed. Piero Sraffra (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004), 135.
3 Lionel Robbins, An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science (London: Macmillan, 1932).
4 Smith, Wealth of Nations, 15.
5 Luigi L. Pasinetti et al., “Cambridge Capital Controversies,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 17, no. 4 (Autumn 2003): 227–32.
6 Ricardo, Principles, 135.
7 “The difference in this respect, between a single country and many, is easily accounted for, by considering the difficulty with which capital moves from one country to another, to seek a more profitable employment, and the activity with which it invariably passes from one province to another in the same country.” Ibid., 135–36.
8 Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1954), 472–73.
9 Robert C. Allen, “The Industrial Revolution in Miniature: The Spinning Jenny in Britain, France, and India,” Journal of Economic History 69, no. 4 (2009):
10 Paul Krugman, “Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade,” American Economic Review 70, no. 5 (Dec. 1980): 950–59.
11 Ricardo, Principles, 136.
13 Ibid., 290.
14 Ibid., 136–37.
15 Steve Keen, ed., Trade: To Whose Advantage? (Canberra: Centre for Continuing Education, 1980).
16 Alan A. Powell, “The Case for Trade Liberalisation: A Brief Statement,” in Trade: To Whose Advantage?, 99–112.
17 Ibid., 102.
18 Hirokazu Ishise, “Capital Heterogeneity as a Source of Comparative Advantage: Putty-Clay Technology in a Ricardian Model,” Journal of International Economics 99 (March 2016): 223.
19 Ricardo Hausmann et al., The Atlas of Economic Complexity: Mapping Paths to Prosperity (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2014).
20 The Atlas of Economic Complexity, online visualizations, http://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/explore/tree_map/export/gha/all/show/2015/.
22 Atlas, 6.
23 Ibid., 44.
24 Ibid., 27.
25 There is no comparable database of domestic production to the SITC database of international trade broken down by product type, but the authors infer that a diversified export portfolio implies a diversified system of domestic production.
26 Atlas, 6.
27 Ibid., 7.
28 Ibid., 34.
29 Ibid., 57.