Final answer:
Sanjaya having the ability to shuck more oysters in one hour than Tatiana does not necessarily mean he has a comparative advantage. To determine comparative advantage, we must assess opportunity costs, not just the total quantity of goods produced.
Step-by-step explanation:
If Sanjaya can shuck more oysters in one hour than Tatiana, then Sanjaya does not necessarily have a comparative advantage in shucking oysters. Comparative advantage involves the consideration of opportunity costs rather than just absolute numbers of oysters shucked.
Comparative advantage indicates the ability of an individual or entity to produce a particular good or service at a lower opportunity cost than others. For instance, using the given example, imagine that in one hour, Maria can make 8 sandwiches or 24 lattes, and Charlie can make 5 sandwiches or 10 lattes. Maria has an absolute advantage in making both sandwiches and lattes because she can make more of them in an hour than Charlie can. However, the comparative advantage is not about quantity but about which good one can produce with the lowest opportunity cost.
Maria's opportunity cost of making one sandwich is 3 lattes, whereas Charlie's is 2 lattes. Therefore, Charlie has a comparative advantage in making sandwiches because he gives up fewer lattes to make one. Similarly, with Sanjaya and Tatiana, we would need to know what other activities they could be doing with that hour and what is the next best alternative foregone. Only then could we determine who has the comparative advantage in shucking oysters.