Final answer:
The protection of an infant industry is recognized as a valid argument for protectionism, and while it is true that economists acknowledge its theoretical merit, the practical application often leads to long-term dependencies rather than the development of competitive industries.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question, "Protection of an infant industry is recognized by economists as a valid argument in favor of protectionism," can be answered as True. The infant industry argument posits that new industries may need temporary protection from international competition until they have developed sufficiently to compete on equal footing. However, while this argument is recognized, its implementation is challenging, as industries that are protected sometimes fail to mature and remain dependent on government support longer than intended.
Indeed, in practice, such protectionism can be difficult to repeal, and in some cases, the infant industries never become competitive. Notably, some East Asian countries have successfully applied the infant industry approach, nurturing their domestic industries until they could compete globally. On the other hand, protectionist measures have also been criticized when used as a facade for imposing trade barriers without supporting industry growth, or when applied to industries that are unable to transition towards market competition after protection ends.