4. The Economics of Location and Spatial Relations
One very popular subdivision of economics has been international trade. In a purely
free market such as we are analyzing in the bulk of this work, there can be no such thing
as an international trade problem, for nations might then possibly continue as cultural expressions
but not as economically meaningful units. Since there would be neither trade nor other barriers
between nations nor currency differences, international trade would become a mere appendage
to a general study of inter-spatial trade. It would not matter whether the trade was within or
outside a nation. The laws of the free market that we have been enunciating apply therefore
to the whole extent of the market, that is, to the world, or the civilized world.
In the case of a completely isolated country, the laws would apply throughout that area.
Thus, the pure interest rate will tend to be uniform throughout the world.
Prices for the same good will tend to be uniform throughout, and therefore, so will wages for
the same type of labor.
Wage rates will tend toward uniformity for the same labor in different geographical areas
in precisely the same way as from industry to industry or firm to firm.
Any temporary differential will induce laborers to move from the low to the high wage area
and businesses to move from the latter to the former until equilibrium is reached.
Once again, just as in the more general case considered before, workers may have particular
positive or negative attachments toward working in a certain area, just as we saw they may
have toward working in a certain industry.
There may be a general psychic benefit from living and working in a certain place, and
a psychic disutility involved in working at some other location.
Since it is psychic, not money, wage rates that are being equalized, money wage rates
will be equalized throughout the world plus or minus negative or positive psychic attachment
components.
That the prices of each good will be uniform throughout the world rests on a precise definition
of the term good.
It is, for example, that wheat is grown in Kansas and that the bulk of the consumers
of the wheat are in New York.
The wheat in Kansas, even when ready for shipment, is not the same good as the wheat in New York.
It may be the same physical-chemical bundle, but it is not the same good vis-à-vis its
objective use value to the consumers.
In short, wheat in Kansas is a higher stage capital good than wheat in New York, when
the consumer is in New York rather than in Kansas.
Transporting the wheat to New York is a stage in the process of production.
The price of wheat in Kansas will then tend to equal the price of wheat in New York, minus
the necessary costs of transport from Kansas to New York.
What determines how people and businesses will be distributed over the face of the Earth?
Obviously, the major factor is the marginal productivity of labor.
This will differ from location to location in accordance with the distribution of natural
resources and the distribution of capital equipment inherited from ancestors.
Another factor influencing location will be positive or negative attachments to certain
The Theory of Money and Credit
The production of raw materials and foodstuffs cannot be centralized and forces people to disperse over the various parts of the earth's surface and joins also upon the processing industries a certain degree of decentralization.
It makes it necessary to consider the problems of transportation as a particular factor of production costs.
The costs of transportation must be weighed against the economies to be expected from more thoroughgoing specialization.
In considering the location of industry, entrepreneurs must account for costs of transportation from raw material sites to the centers of consumer population.
Certain areas of the world will tend to have higher costs of transportation than other parts.
For the same products, Alaskan consumers must be willing to pay higher prices in Alaska than in San Francisco, even though purchasing power and prices are uniform throughout the world.
As a result, the cost component for anyone working in Alaska will be a certain positive amount.
Because of the transport problem, the same money wage in Alaska will buy fewer goods than in San Francisco.
This increased cost of living establishes a positive cost component in the wage,
so that for similar labor, a worker would require a higher money wage to work in Alaska than elsewhere.
If the costs attached to a geographical area are particularly high or low, a positive or a negative cost component will be attached to the wage rate in that area.
Instead of saying that money wage rates for the same type of labor will be equalized throughout the world,
World, we must say rather that there will be a tendency for equalization of money wage
rates plus or minus the attachment component, and plus or minus the cost component for every
geographic area.
The purchasing power of the monetary unit will also be equalized throughout the world.
This case will be treated in Chapter 11 on money.
The tendency of an advancing market economy, of course, is to lower transportation costs,
that is, to increase labor productivity in the transport field.
Other things being equal, then, the cost components tend to become relatively less important as
the economy progresses.
We have seen that a good must be considered as homogeneous in use value and not in physical
substance. Wheat in Kansas was a different good from wheat in New York. Some economists
have taken the law that all goods tend to be uniform in price throughout the world economy
to mean that all physically homogeneous things will be equal in price. But a difference in
In position with respect to consumers makes a physically identical thing a different good.
Suppose for example that two firms are producing a certain product, say cement, and that one
is located in Rochester and one in Detroit.
Let us say that the bulk of the consumers of cement are in New York City.
Let us call the cement produced in Rochester C.R. and the cement produced in Detroit C.D.
Now in equilibrium the price of C.R. in New York City will equal the price of C.R. in
Rochester plus the freight cost from Rochester to New York.
Also in equilibrium the price of C.D. in New York City will equal the price of C.D. in
in Detroit plus the freight cost from Detroit to New York.
Which cement prices will be equal to each other in equilibrium?
Many writers maintain that the price of CR in Rochester
will be equal to the price of CD in Detroit.
That is, that the mill prices or the FOB prices of cement
will be equal in each of the two localities in equilibrium.
But it is clear that these writers have adopted
the confusion of treating good in the technological
rather than in the use value sense.
This error lies at the root of attacks
on the basing point system of pricing in some industries.
The critics assume that uniform pricing of a good
means uniform pricing at the various mills, whereas it really implies uniform delivered
prices of the various firms at any given consumer center.
We must, in short, take the point of view of the consumer, the man who uses the good,
and he is in New York City.
From his point of view, cement in Detroit is a far different good from cement in Rochester
since Rochester is closer to him and freight costs are greater from Detroit.
From his point of view, the homogeneous goods are CR in New York City and CD in New York
City.
Wherever it comes from, cement at the place where he must use it is the homogeneous good
for the Consumer Therefore, in equilibrium, it is CR in New
York City that will be equal to CD in New York City, and these are the delivered prices
of cement to the consumer.
For purposes of simplification, we have omitted the consumers in Rochester, Detroit and elsewhere,
but the same law applies to them.
For consumers in Rochester and Detroit in equilibrium, P CR in Rochester equals P CD in Rochester,
and P CR in Detroit equals P CD in Detroit, etc.
Substituting this equality in the equations, we see that it implies that the price of CR
in Rochester plus freight cost from Rochester to New York will equal the price of CD in
Detroit plus freight cost from Detroit to New York.
The freight costs at any time are readily calculable, and Ceteris Paribus, they will
be greater for longer distances.
In other words, in equilibrium on the free market, the price of CR in Rochester is equal
is applicable to the price of CD in Detroit, plus the differential in freight costs for the longer as compared to the shorter distance to the consumer.
Generalizing, the mill price of cement at a shorter distance from the consumer will equal the mill price of cement at the longer distance plus the freight differential.
This is applicable not only to cement, but to every product in the economic system, and not only to products serving ultimate consumers, but also to those to be consumed by lower-order capitalists.
In proportion as firms are more distantly located from the consumer, they will then not be able to remain in business unless their average costs at the mill are sufficiently lower than those of their competitors, to compensate for the increased freight costs.
This is not, as might be thought, a penalty on the technological superiority of the distant firm, for the latter is inferior with respect to the important economic factor of location.
It is precisely this mechanism that helps to determine the location of firms, and assures that firms will be economically located in relation to the consumer.
The influence of the location difference factor in the price of a product will, of course, depend upon the proportion that freight costs bear to the other costs of producing the good.
The higher the proportion, the greater the influence.
A firm with a location closer to the consumer market, therefore has a spatial advantage conferred by its location.
Given the same costs in other fields as its competitors, it earns a profit from its superior location.
The gains of location will be imputed to the site value of the ground land of the plant.
The owner of the site obtains its marginal value product.
Therefore, gains to a firm resulting from improvement in locational advantage, as well
as losses resulting from a locational disadvantage, will accrue as changes in ground rent and
capital value to the owner of the specific site, whether the owner be the firm itself
for Someone Else.