scholarly journals Trade Agreements, Competition, and the Environment: Gridlock at the Crossroads: Discussion

1994 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily A. McClain

Seale and Fairchild cover an ambitious array of issues in their paper on “Trade Agreements, Competition, and the Environment”. Perhaps it is this ambition that leads their discussion to be too generalized in some areas. Their paper is organized into several sections: (1) a review of trade theory and generalizations about resource use (“GATT or NAFTA, Does it matter?”); (2) issues that link trade and environmental policy; (3) observations on shifts in U.S. trade policy behavior; and (4) perspectives on the changes and adjustment facing southern agriculture. I would like to challenge some of their assertions about regional trading blocs, and the environment and resource use.

Author(s):  
Leonardo Borlini

An increasingly important aspect of EU trade policy since the lifting of its self-imposed moratorium on preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has been the inclusion of WTO+ provisions on subsidies in bilateral agreements negotiated with a number of third countries. This article covers the main bilateral PTAs negotiated after the publication of the Commission’s Communication on ‘Global Europe’ in order to explore the implications of the different subsidy disciplines they set out. It also discusses the questions that arise when examining the legal discipline of public aid provided by such agreements, regarding not only the substantive appropriateness of standards and rules on compatibility, but also the procedural mechanisms designed to guarantee the implementation and the enforcement of such rules. It concludes that the most advanced among the EU PTAs are shaped as competition regulation and go beyond a mere negative function, ensuring that subsidies can contribute to fundamental public goals.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Ferrari ◽  
Matteo Fiorini ◽  
Joseph Francois ◽  
Bernard Hoekman ◽  
Lisa Maria Lechner ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (5) ◽  
pp. 48-65
Author(s):  
ONYSHCHENKO Volodymyr

Background. Dynamic changes in international economic relations and trade for thorough analysis and forecasting require an adequate paradigm of international trade theory, which would take into account not only economic and political factors of its development, but also the diverse civilizational context of the world community, which determines mental, social and cultural features of the development of a country. Problem research state. Problems of political economy in international trade to some extent affect the research of P. Krugman, M. Obstfeld, J. Frieden, E. Helpman, P. S. Afontsev, A. Mazaraki, T. Melnyk, V. Panchenko, N. Reznikova and others. But the structure of its methodological discourse and the subject of its research remain unclear. The aim of the articleis to clarify the political and economic discourse of the theory of international trade. Materials and methods. The materials of the research were the works of domestic and foreign specialists. In the process of preparing the article, general scientific research methods were used: historical, logical analysis, synthesis and abstraction. Results. Political economy is a normative manifestation of economic theory, which is formed under the influence of socio-economic and political concepts, the formed goals of social development. The subject of political economy of international trade – economic and socio-political relations that determine and accompany international trade and determine the goals and content of trade policy of its subjects. It is proposed to expand the mechanism of formation of relative advantages and trade policy of the country by including factors that determine not only its economic potential and specialization, but also the risks that may be caused by political decisions. It is argued that the problem of «protectionism vs liberalism» in international trade at the state level will always exist. It turns out that the problem of justice in international economic relations and trade is determined by the civilizational content of the development of countries, in which human capital plays a crucial role. Conclusion. The paradigm of political economy in international trade should be based on an expanded interpretation of relative benefits by assessing the impact of economic, social and political institutionson them, the peculiarities of national trade policies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 378-380
Author(s):  
Inu Manak

U.S. trade policy is not what it used to be. Since the U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership in January 2017, Indo-Pacific trade relations have been in constant flux. It is not clear where U.S. trade policy will end up, particularly with regard to its relationship with China. However, the conclusion of two renegotiations of previous U.S. trade agreements can tell us generally about the new U.S. approach and what this means for our trading partners. I will discuss developments from the renegotiation of the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement (KORUS) and the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) as a replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document