摘要：The first part of this paper showed that the neo-classical theory of
international trade leads to conclusions that contradict the facts or leads to
no conclusions that can be verified. The version of the theory with two
factors and the same production functions in different countries has some
appeal because relative abundance of factors or intensities of their use have
consistent meaning and make the theory plausible, but it results in the
Leontief paradox and factor price equalisation. This appeal is lost when the
number of factors is greater than two or production functions are not the
same in different countries; relative abundance and intensity can not be
consistently ranked or their connections to the pattern of trade is not the
simple one of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory. Nor does the theory have much
left to say; the kind of verifiable general prediction that was possible with
two factors is not possible when the factors are more than two; such
conclusions as can, in principle, be drawn are specific to the general
equilibrium calculated for a given set of production functions and a given
set of countries, with specified factor endowments and consumer
preferences.
