Introduction: approaches to explaining American foreign economic policy

1988 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. John Ikenberry ◽  
David A. Lake ◽  
Michael Mastanduno

Despite its relative economic decline, the United States remains the dominant power in the world economy. The foreign economic actions taken by American officials, whether they involve trade, technology transfer, or the value of the dollar, continue to have profound consequences for other states in the international system, as well as for American domestic politics and economics. Thus, it is not surprising that the study of American foreign economic policy attracts considerable scholarly attention, and presently constitutes a major portion of the subfield of international political economy.

Author(s):  
Daniel Sargent

Foreign economic policy involves the mediation and management of economic flows across borders. Over two and a half centuries, the context for U.S. foreign economic policy has transformed. Once a fledgling republic on the periphery of the world economy, the United States has become the world’s largest economy, the arbiter of international economic order, and a predominant influence on the global economy. Throughout this transformation, the making of foreign economic policy has entailed delicate tradeoffs between diverse interests—political and material, foreign and domestic, sectional and sectoral, and so on. Ideas and beliefs have also shaped U.S. foreign economic policy—from Enlightenment-era convictions about the pacifying effects of international commerce to late 20th-century convictions about the efficacy of free markets.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 107-113
Author(s):  
Iaroslav Petrunenko ◽  
Oleg Podtserkovnyi

Complex and contradictory processes of modern social transformations and the need to overcome the crisis in the economy require the appropriate influence of the state and a clear system of socio-economic management through the formation and implementation of effective state economic policy. The main elements of economic policy are financial and credit, budgetary, scientific and technical, structural, social, investment, agricultural, regional, foreign economic policy. The implementation of state economic policy is considered in terms of the relationship between social problems and the state. Therefore, the purpose of the article is to study the essence, tools and methods of state economic policy in modern conditions. It is also necessary to identify the main risks and features of further development of state economic policy of individual states in a global imbalance and crisis. The theoretical part is devoted to the study of the essence of state economic policy, theoretical and practical aspects of its organization in the state, as well as tools that can be used by the state. The resulting part is devoted to the consideration of the situation, in which the world economy has found itself in 2020 in the conditions of the economic COVID-19 crisis. General forecasts have not provided to individual states because it has been impossible to predict the end of the pandemic and the return of the world to normal life. However, it is clear that the world economy has undergone irreversible processes that will synergistically affect different states in different ways. The crisis has hit a significant number of industries, including tourism, logistics, hotel business, the crisis has been felt in world markets: oil prices have collapsed, as well as the stock markets. Undoubtedly, there are areas with a rapid growth, especially the pharmaceutical industry and retail, online delivery services, IT entertainment and communications industry, information marketing business and education and training services. It is likely that the indicators of economic development in the states by the end of the year will be better than the results of the first half of the year. The basic forecast of economic world development assumes a sharp growth of the economy after a short recession after quarantine. The financial capabilities of the EU states vary considerably, but each state must pursue counter-cyclical policies aimed at stabilizing its own economy. The answer to the question of what kind of crisis response policy they can afford depends on the fiscal policy of the states before the crisis. In economically developed states, where emergency measures have been introduced, governments and central banks issue trillions of dollars in government spending, social support of citizens, and interest-free business loans to limit the economic damage of quarantine. At the same time, in Latin America and Southeast Asia, total quarantine is impossible in multi-million cities. Such states have a triple effect of suffering from the virus, the environment and poverty. States dependent on the export of natural resources and raw materials, when faced with the crisis, are forced to sell them for nothing, so they will suffer great losses. More than 150 states have set up anti-crisis headquarters and are taking anti-crisis measures. The authors have also tried to predict how largescale the global economic crisis will be for Ukraine, what consequences await it, and what measures need to be taken to overcome it.


1988 ◽  
Vol 8 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 265-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffry A. Frieden

ABSTRACTThis essay analyzes the relationship between international investment interests and foreign economic policy. The first step and level of analysis looks at nation-states as the relevant actors, and claims that a country's international investment position tends to affect its international economic preferences in ways that are easily understood and anticipated. Countries' international asset positions often have a predictable impact on their policies toward international monetary relations, cross-border investment, and trade.The second step and level of analysis looks inside national societies at the international asset positions of various domestic groups. It argues that sectors with varying interests related to their international investment positions contend for influence over national policy. The economic circumstances of each sector lead to sectoral policy preferences with predictable implications for domestic bargaining over foreign economic policy. The general argument is applied briefly to a number of modern creditor countries and sectors, most prominently the United States after World War Two.


Author(s):  
Valentin K. POSPELOV ◽  
Valentina N. MIRONOVA ◽  
Petr I. CHUVAKHIN

China's economic policies were transformed during the reform period that started in 1979, when the most populated country in the world adopted market-based reforms. Currently, China not only has grown to become the second largest and mid income economy in the world from one of the world's poorest countries, but also actively advances the free trade policy and fills the developing niches, although the latter has caused some concerns. The Chines active economic policy along with its economic and political strengthening in addition to the tensions with the United States rise the question whether the Chinese economic policy should be resisted? This paper analyses the different aspects of China’s economic policy and intents to answer the question based on the importance of the Chinese role in the world economy and development while the public opinion toward China’s economic strengthening has been considered as well.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Salif Kone ◽  

The trade war, which antagonizes today the United States and China, questions the free trade principle in international trade. To show the dangerousness of this trade war for the world economy, this paper explores the theoretical limits of the comparative advantage principle by analyzing the limitations of the applicability of the comparative costs and endowments criteria. We conclude that the international trade theories not based on the comparative advantage principle are the exception to the rule and therefore, cannot be used to justify the American positions, except to introduce a certain degree of political considerations. Specifically, we show that the international trade theories, other than the Ricardian theory and the HOS factorial theory, are exceptions to the applicability of the comparative costs and endowments criteria. In light of this argument, one should seek explanations of the war-like trade logic of the Trump Administration in the international political economy. In this perspective, international trade is no longer necessarily a positive-sum game.


Author(s):  
W. Kindred Winecoff

First-wave international political economy (IPE) was preoccupied with the “complex interdependencies” within a world system that (it believed) was rapidly devolving following the 1971 collapse of the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates. The original IPE scholars were more dedicated to theorizing about the emergence and evolution of global systems than any strict methodology. As IPE developed, it began to emphasize the possibility that institutions could promote cooperation in an anarchic environment, so IPE scholarship increasingly studied the conditions under which these institutions might emerge. Second-wave IPE scholars began to focus on the domestic “level of analysis” for explanatory power, and in particular analyzed the role of domestic political institutions in promoting global economic cooperation (or conflict). They also employed a “second-image reversed” paradigm in which the international system was treated as an explanatory variable that influenced the domestic policymaking process. In opening up the “black box” of domestic politics, in particular as it pertained to foreign economic policy, the “American school” of IPE thoroughly explored the terrain with regression-based statistical models that assume observational independence. As a result, complex interdependencies in the global system were increasingly ignored. Over time the analytical focus progressively shifted to micro-level units—firms and individuals, whenever possible—using neoclassical economic theory as its logical underpinning (with complications for political factors). This third wave of IPE, “open economy politics,” has been criticized in the post-crisis period for its narrow focus, rigid methodology, and lack of systemic theory. Leading scholars have called modern IPE “boring,” “deplorable,” “myopic,” and “reductionist,” among other epithets. A “fourth-wave” of IPE must retain its strong commitment to empiricism while re-integrating systemic processes into its analysis. A new class of complex statistical models is capable of incorporating interdependencies as well as domestic- and individual-level processes into a common framework. This will allow scholars to model the global political economy as an interdependent system consisting of multiple strata.


1989 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter B. Evans

Alternative explanations for the formation of U.S. foreign economic policy are explored using the acrimonious but inconclusive conflict between the United States and its largest South American ally over Brazil's restrictive policies toward the computer industry. After comparing a post-dependency/bargaining perspective, the theory of hegemonic stability, and Stephen Krasner's structural conflict model, the article argues that systemic perspectives on foreign economic policy must be complemented by an account of the interaction between the effects of international position and the dynamics of domestic politics. The resulting politicized state-centric approach, which integrates interest-based politics and ideologically defined state aims, is proposed as a means of more fully understanding the dilemmas of a declining hegemon.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document