<p>This essay in economic geography describes what intra-firm trade as a concept is and different ways to determine in which cases trade is to be labeled as intra-firm trade (IFT) or not. The method used by the author is most easily described as descriptive. This method was chosen in order to test if existing theories; classic and neoclassic economics, new trade theory and international business studies, are capable to explain the phenomena of IFT. The theories are tested trough primary and secondary literature but also trough reasoning by the author.</p><p>The conclusion is that the most reasonable way to determine whether trade occurs intra-firm or not, is to decide upon a 5-% rule where it when one part owns 5-% of the voting strength in the other company is to be considered intra-firm trade. This is a conclusion based on several reasons; the strongest one being that a common view on IFT could boost comparative studies as the U.S already collects data based on the 5-% rule.</p><p>Classic and neoclassic economics are incapable of explaining IFT as aprerequisite for these theories is that markets are perfect. IFT can only beexplained by models building on imperfect markets hence new trade theory and international business are more successful in explaining IFT.</p>

This essay in economic geography describes what intra-firm trade as a concept is and different ways to determine in which cases trade is to be labeled as intra-firm trade (IFT) or not. The method used by the author is most easily described as descriptive. This method was chosen in order to test if existing theories; classic and neoclassic economics, new trade theory and international business studies, are capable to explain the phenomena of IFT. The theories are tested trough primary and secondary literature but also trough reasoning by the author. The conclusion is that the most reasonable way to determine whether trade occurs intra-firm or not, is to decide upon a 5-% rule where it when one part owns 5-% of the voting strength in the other company is to be considered intra-firm trade. This is a conclusion based on several reasons; the strongest one being that a common view on IFT could boost comparative studies as the U.S already collects data based on the 5-% rule. Classic and neoclassic economics are incapable of explaining IFT as aprerequisite for these theories is that markets are perfect. IFT can only beexplained by models building on imperfect markets hence new trade theory and international business are more successful in explaining IFT.

No description available.