本文指出Delias（1986）文中之解非為貿易均衡下之競爭性均衡解，且其實證分析亦非源自其理論模型。為使Delias之買證分析有理論依據，吾人將勞動引入Delias的模型中，然配適度檢定棄卸了Delias模型（包含勞動）的適當性。因此Delias無法證明其文中之主要結論（國際間產出共變源自於彼此間技術變動的相互關聯，而非彼此間貿易的相互依存）的正當性。

　　　　　This comment shows that neither is the solution in Delias' paper(1986) a competitive equilibrium under balanced trade nor is hisempirical analysis implied by his model. Labor is included in Delias' model to justify his empirical strategy. However, the adequacy of Delias' model (with labor) is rejected by a goodness-of-fittest. Thus Delias' main empirical conclusion that the comovementsof output are due to the common production shocks rather than trade links is not justified.