49 Articles Manoilescu's Approach of "Losses of Trade": a Ricardian Interpretation * University of Picardie, CRIISEA (France), nenovsky@gmail.com ** University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, GREDEC – CNRS (France), Dominique.Torre@gredeg.cnrs.fr 1 This interpretation of the rate of profit uniformity has been the origin during the eighties of the so called “gravitation theory” literature, see for instance, Arena, Froeschlé and Torre (1990). Nikolay Nenovsky* Dominique Torre** Summary This paper contributes to a testament of the conclusions of Manoilescu, the validity of which we test analytically. We develop a model proving that the Manoilescu assumption can be integrated into a Ricardian setting. We find that in some cases, traditional domestic sectors should be protected, even if the law of comparative advantages suggests another solution. Keywords: theory of protectionism, gains from trade, economic though, Mihail Manoilescu JEL Classification: B22, B26, E42 1. Introduction M anoilescu’s writings on protectionism comprise repeated attacks against the Ricardian theory of external trade. They present a way to develop and launch an original, albeit not perfectly rigorous critique against the classical theory of the advantages of trade, as much as to make a systematic overview of own views. The latter are based on different assumptions about labor productivity, which lacks in Ricardo’s approach as presented in Chapter 7 of the Principles. It is difficult to completely subscribe to Manoilescu in this assessment of whether there is an underlying assumption of equal productivity of labor in Ricardo’s theory. Ever since Ricardo’s conception saw a revival in the second half of the 20th century, after the publication of his complete works by Piero Sraffa, it has been generally challenged. It would be more precise to claim that Ricardo in The Principles of Political Economy and in his previous or later writings, assumes that there is a uniform rate of profit in the economy. The third paragraph of the Chapter 7, On Foreign Trade begins indeed with the following statement: “The profits of different employments have a tendency to conform to one another: to advance and recede together”. In this book, the uniform “rate of profit”, cannot be interpreted as a simple index of the productivity of agricultural goods in the Essays on Profits where input and output are ontologically homogeneous. In the text of Principles, the uniform “rate of profit” is generally defined, in the Smithsonian tradition, as the result of competition among producers 1 . In the works of Sraffa (1960), this uniform rate of profit is expressed by the conditions of production of the so-called “basic commodities”. In the Ricardian approach - then legitimated by subsequent progresses of linear algebra - a distinction is indeed introduced between basic and non-basic Economic Alternatives, 2018, Issue 1, pp. 49-54