Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ruomoplus.lib.uom.gr/handle/8000/1230
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorParaskevopoulou, Christina-
dc.contributor.authorTsaliki, Persefoni-
dc.contributor.authorTsoulfidis, Lefteris-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-22T08:18:04Z-
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-16T08:48:15Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-22T08:18:04Z-
dc.date.available2024-05-16T08:48:15Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/02692171.2016.1173655en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://ruomoplus.lib.uom.gr/handle/8000/1230-
dc.description.abstractAccording to the popular Heckscher-Ohlin model of international trade, a country is expected to export (import) those products whose production requires the intensive use of the factor of production that is in relative abundance (scarcity). Leontief (1953), using input–output data of the US economy for the year 1947, found that the US, an overwhelmingly capital-abundant country, exported labour-intensive products and imported capital-intensive ones. Clearly, the results contradicted the predictions of the Heckscher-Ohlin model and they were characterised as ‘Leontief’s paradox’. A number of explanations for the so-called paradox were offered and this paper briefly, but critically, evaluates these explanations as it examines whether or not Leontief’s results persist in the case of the US economy during the period 1998–2012.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherRoutledge-
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Review of Applied Economicsen_US
dc.subjectFRASCATI__Social sciences__Economics and Business__Economicsen_US
dc.subject.otherLeontief’s paradoxen_US
dc.subject.otherinternational tradeen_US
dc.subject.otherUS economyen_US
dc.subject.otherfactor contenten_US
dc.titleRevisiting Leontief’s paradoxen_US
dc.typejournal articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/02692171.2016.1173655en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Macedonia-
dc.relation.issn0269-2171-
dc.description.volume30en_US
dc.description.issue6en_US
dc.description.startpage693en_US
dc.description.endpage713en_US
local.identifier.ruomoUUID1af18594-15e2-4125-915c-407a99f19e26-
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Economics-
dc.relation.eissn1465-3486en_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypejournal article-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.grantfulltextopen-
crisitem.author.deptUniversity of Macedonia-
crisitem.author.deptUniversity of Macedonia-
crisitem.author.deptUniversity of Macedonia-
crisitem.author.departmentDepartment of Economics-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-2691-0128-
crisitem.author.facultySchool of Economic and Regional Studies-
crisitem.journal.journalissn0269-2171-
Appears in Collections:Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
Tsoulfidis_IRAE_Revisiting Leontief's Paradox_2R.pdf276,38 kBAdobe PDF
View/Open
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

9
checked on May 11, 2026

Page view(s)

253
checked on May 12, 2026

Download(s)

1,522
checked on May 12, 2026

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.