我自己找的一些文章，也不知道论坛里是不是已经有了，所以发上来给大家共享，如果已经有了的话，请版主删除吧













我自己找的一些文章，也不知道论坛里是不是已经有了，所以发上来给大家共享，如果已经有了的话，请版主删除吧

谢谢楼下的同学，我忘了添加简介，现在加上：
《Free Trade and Wage Inequality in an Advanced Economy》
This paper develops a formal model for examining the impact of free trade on the wage inequality
in the Northern economy and the sensitivity of wage inequality indices to changes in causal factors
within a general equilibrium setting.
The model has three types of labor: sector-specific high-skilled, mobile unskilled and immobile
unskilled labor. Thus, three types of wage inequality indices are derived. Selected comparative
statics for changes in consumer expenditure shares, biased technological changes, changes in
relative endowments are provided.

《Free Trade, Fair Trade and Gender Inequality in Less Developed Countries》
Fair trade is often viewed as an alternative to free trade that reduces global inequality and
poverty. This paper examines whether fair trade is truly an alternative to the free market,
and as a consequence whether it can effectively advance gender equality and alleviate the
poverty of women in less developed countries (LDCs). First, neoclassical economics and
trade liberalization policies are reviewed. The paper then examines how fair trade seeks to
correct market imperfections, thereby making the free market more effi cient in distributing
wealth. The ability of fair trade to address the central issues related to trade liberalization
and women in LDCs is discussed, and the gendered structures of fair trade identifi ed.
Whether fair trade can provide gender equality within global capitalist structures is a theoretical
matter that requires further empirical inquiry. Suggestions for future research,
informed by feminist theories of the political economy, are provided. Copyright © 2009
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

《INCOME INEQUALITY AND CHOICE OF FREE TRADE IN A MODEL OF INTRAINDUSTRY TRADE》
This paper explains why developed countries impose more trade barriers on middle-income countries than on either poor or other developed countries. We use a median voter model of the choice between trade and autarky embedded within an intraindustry trade model similar to Krugman. Our main result is the deriva- tion of conditions under which a rich country rejects trade with middle-income countries, but accepts trade with either similar or poor countries. We also show that if increased inequality lowers median wealth in the developed country, the range of countries for which free trade is rejected is enlarged.

《FREE TRADE, POVERTY,AND THE ENVIRONMENT》
Proponents of free trade argue that the moral case for free trade is strong in
light of the fact that it is the quickest way to reduce poverty. In fact, the view
that free trade is good for the poor is so widely accepted that it is hard to get a
word in edge-wise. The Economist, the World Bank, and the International Monetary
Fund accept this claim with nearly dogmatic ideological passion.1 Many
philosophers, economists, and lawyers are similarly convinced that the case for
free trade is strong because it will reduce poverty.2 For instance, Fernando Teson
and Jonathan Klick follow many economists in suggesting that the Argument from
Comparative Advantage largely vindicates this conclusion.3 On the other hand,
opponents of free trade counter, just as dogmatically, that free trade will lead to
environmental problems like climate change.4 For instance, some advance the
Race to the Bottom Argument on which free trade will put downward pressure on
regulatory standards increasing pollution and, so, environmental problems.5
This paper considers the case for free trade on the assumption that there is an
obligation to reduce poverty and mitigate environmental problems.6 After showing
how the tension between the proponent and opponent of free trade can be
overcome, it canvases and defends a class of proposals that capture the benefi ts
of free trade for the poor and the environment while avoiding the costs. Traderelated
adjustment assistance programs, linkage, trade barriers, and consumer
movements (like the Fair Trade movement) may be necessary and desirable.
The WTO’s proscription of many of these alternatives may be unjustifi able.7 At
least, the paper concludes, these alternatives merit consideration if they are the
most effi cient means of helping the poor and the environment and appropriate
institutional safeguard are put in place to prevent abuse.
Obviously, there are incredibly important and interesting questions about how
to balance a concern for poverty against a concern for the environment (and how
these concerns should be balanced against other concerns we might have). Most
philosophical work on poverty and the environment focuses on these questions.
These questions are not the only questions worth considering, however. There is
a lot worth saying even in the absence of answers to these questions. And, in any
case, this paper considers what someone who cares about both poverty and the
environment can say about free trade without such answers.
The fi rst section of this paper sets out the normative framework we will use
in considering the case for free trade. It shows that one who cares about the environment
should care about the poor, and one who cares about the poor should
care about the environment. It also points out that although a concern for the poor
and a concern for the environment may give us reason to support trade policies
that confl ict these concerns may not lead to confl icting policy recommendations.
The second section considers and critiques one of the main arguments for free
trade: the Argument from Comparative Advantage. The third section articulates
and examines one of the strongest arguments against free trade: the Race to the
Bottom Argument. The fourth section considers an objection that applies to both
sorts of argument. The fi fth section suggests a few alternative trade policies that
might help capture some of the benefi ts while avoiding some of the costs of free
trade for the poor. Finally, the sixth section responds to objections to using trade
policy to meet ethical objectives.

《The Wealth of Nations and the Poverty of Producers: The Conflict between Free Trade and
the New Deal Farm Program》
不好意思，这篇文章本身没有introduction,而我也是在几年前看过的，内容不是记得很清楚了，所以就没法提供了。