scholarly journals How Bargaining Alters Outcomes: Bilateral Trade Negotiations and Bargaining Strategies

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 399-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Elms
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Final Outcome ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Negotiation Strategies ◽  
Market Opening ◽  
Auto Parts ◽  
Value Claiming ◽  
The U.S

AbstractThis article considers bargaining strategies used by government negotiators in the context of bilateral trade disputes. I argue that trade officials reach the most durable agreements by using an integrative, or value-creating, strategy and avoiding the use of threats. By contrast, a highly distributive, value-claiming strategy coupled with loud public threats is unlikely to result in a durable agreement and frequently leads to deadlocked negotiations. The irony, however, is that American officials use the latter approach more frequently than the former in bilateral trade disputes. These strategies are usually chosen unconsciously in response to perceptions of losses that drive negotiators to select risky approaches to resolve disputes.By examining bargaining strategies in the U.S. disputes with Japan and South Korea over automobiles and auto parts in the 1990s, this article identifies shifts in negotiation strategies. These shifts in approach closely track the outcomes in these two deeply contentious disputes. After protracted and contentious negotiations with Japan, the final outcome represented a failure to achieve the Americans' most important goals. A less confrontational strategy with South Korea ultimately resulted in greater market opening.

scholarly journals “Path-Dependency” Effect in Japan-U.S. Trade

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 31-39
Author(s):  
Z. Podoba ◽  
V. Gorshkov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Path Dependency ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
The U.S

The paper addresses current issues in Japan-U.S. foreign trade following the signing of the Japan-U.S. Trade Agreement and the Japan-U.S. Agreement on Digital Trade in October 2019. By providing an overview of Japan-U.S. trade relations, analyzing current trends in bilateral foreign trade and outlining basic terms of new bilateral agreements, the authors conclude that “path-dependency” in Japan-U.S. contemporary foreign trade persists and trade relations between the two countries are to a greater extent influenced by the U.S. trade policy which aims to assure a broader access of American companies to Japanese markets – the situation that was typical for bilateral trade relations since the 1980s. “Path-dependency” in Japan-U.S. trade relations, conventionally categorized by the existence of numerous trade contradictions, is pronounced in the unchanged goals, strategy and tactics of foreign trade negotiations. The United States maintains its “attacking” role and dominates in the bilateral trade negotiations, while Japan, despite its enhancing influence in the multilateral trading system and regional trade agreements, is forced to “self-defend” and make concessions to a more dominant partner in order to maintain its automobile exports to the United States at the expense of its national interests in other industries, particularly in the agricultural sector. Thus, new trade agreements are unlikely to cause significant structural changes in Japan-U.S. bilateral trade in the shortterm as the problem of persistent trade deficits remains. In order to break the vicious circle of “path-dependency” Japan is to actively cooperate with the economies of the European Union which have large amounts of trade deficits with the U.S., can serve as a mediator in the U.S. – China trade conflicts, as well with other Asian countries via mega-FTAs which possess potential risks to the United States. Further development of foreign trade cooperation will depend on the initiatives of new governments in both countries.

Trump's China tariff ceasefire buys time for talks

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
South East Asia ◽  
Xi Jinping ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Content Type

Subject China-US trade talks. Significance On June 29, US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping met on the margins of the G20 meeting in Osaka, primarily to discuss the ongoing bilateral trade disputes. The results of the meeting can be considered progress in that they averted a further escalation of tariffs and agreed to resume trade negotiations, the latest round of which broke down seven weeks ago. Impacts South-east Asia, which benefits from firms redirecting investment, can probably count on US tariffs remaining in place during negotiations. US pressure on other states to choose 5G hardware from Western companies rather than from Huawei has not been addressed. Trump will face bipartisan anger from Congress if he eases restrictions on Huawei.

Disability, Stigma, and Children's Developing Selves

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Misa Kayama ◽  
Wendy Haight ◽  
May-Lee Ku ◽  
Minhae Cho ◽  
Hee Yun Lee
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Inclusive Education ◽  
Children With Disabilities ◽  
Cultural Psychology ◽  
Peer Group ◽  
Individual Development ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Everyday Lives ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Stigmatization is part of the everyday lives of children with disabilities, their families, and their friends. Negative social encounters, even with perfect strangers, can dampen joyful occasions, add stress to challenging situations, and lead to social isolation. This book describes a program of research spanning a decade that seeks to understand disabilities in their developmental and cultural contexts. The authors are especially interested in understanding adults’ socialization practices that promise to reduce stigmatization in the next generation. Guided by developmental cultural psychology, including the concept of “universalism without uniformity,” the authors focus on the understandings and responses to disability and associated stigmatization of elementary-school educators practicing in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the U.S. Educators from all four cultural groups expressed strikingly similar concerns about the impact of stigmatization on the emerging cultural self, both of children with disabilities and their typically developing peers. Educators also described culturally nuanced socialization goals and practices pertaining to inclusive education. In Japan, for instance, educators emphasized the importance of peer group belonging and strategies to support the participation of children with disabilities. In the U.S., educators placed relatively more emphasis on individual development and discussed strategies for the equitable treatment of children with disabilities. Educators in South Korea and Taiwan emphasized the cultivation of compassion in typically developing children. The understanding gained through examination of how diverse individuals address common challenges using cultural resources available in their everyday lives provides important lessons for strengthening theory, policy, and programs.

The Impact of COVID-19 Crisis on Major Spectator Sport Industry in the U.S. and South Korea: Challenges and Outlook

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Sungho Cho ◽  
NaRi Shin ◽  
Dae Hee Kwak ◽  
Amy Chan Hyung Kim ◽  
Won Seok Jang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Spectator Sport ◽  
Sport Industry ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

Russia–ASEAN: Trade and Global Value Chains

2015 ◽  
pp. 25-39
Author(s):  
K. Muradov
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Value Chain ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Global Value Chains ◽  
Trade Flows ◽  
Value Chains ◽  
Trade Data ◽  
Traded Goods ◽  
Trade In Value Added

Traditional trade statistics that originate in customs records is inadequate to measure the complex interdependencies in today’s globalized economy, or what is known as the global value chains. The article focuses on Russia–ASEAN trade. The author applies innovative methods of measuring trade in value added terms in order to capture the unobserved bilateral linkages behind the officially recorded trade flows. First, customs and balance of payments sources of bilateral trade data are briefly reviewed. For user, there are at least two inherent problems in those data: the inconsistencies in “mirror” trade flows and the attribution of the origin of a traded product wholly to the exporting country. This results in large discrepancies between Russian and ASEAN “mirror” trade data and, arguably, their low importance as each other’s trade partners. Next, the author explores new data from inter-country input-output tables that necessarily reconcile bilateral differences and offer greater detail about the national and sectoral origin or destination of traded goods and services. Relevant data are derived from the OECD-WTO TiVA database and are rearranged to obtain various estimates of Russia–ASEAN trade in value added in 2009. The main finding is that sizable amount of the value added of Russian origin is embodied in third countries’ exports to ASEAN members and ASEAN members’ exports to third countries. As a result, the cumulative flow of Russia’s value added to ASEAN members is estimated to be 62% larger than the direct gross exports, whereas for China and South Korea it is, respectively, 21% and 23% smaller. The indirect, unobserved value added flows can be largely explained by the use of Russian energy resources, chemicals and metals as imported inputs in third countries (China, South Korea) and ASEAN members’ own production. The contribution of these inputs is then accumulated along the value chain. Finally, the most important sectoral value chains are visualized for readers’ convenience. So far, it’s apparent that Russia is linked to ASEAN countries through intricate production networks and indirectly contributes to their trade with third countries.

scholarly journals An Analysis of Interaction Effects of China–South Korea and China– Australia FTAs and the Expanding TPP

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 12-22
Author(s):  
Sun Yuhong ◽  
Mu Yifei ◽  
Jun Yang
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium Model ◽  
Economic Welfare ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
The U.S

Abstract On 5 October 2015, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) led by the U.S. was signed. Already, 12 countries1 have joined the agreement, but China has not. Thus, lots of research has focused on the negative effect of the TPP on China’s foreign trade. On the other hand, China is moving forward in its own efforts to establish bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) and free trade zones. In June 2015, China-South Korea and China-Australia signed bilateral FTAs which went into effect in December 2015. Several questions were raised: Since South Korea and Australia are the major trade partners in the Pacific area and the bilateral FTAs will be effective before the TPP, will these FTAs’ positive effects on China’s foreign trade offset some of the negative effects of the TPP? If China and the U.S. adopted a competitive trade policy, which countries would benefit? If China and the U.S. adopted a cooperative trade policy, how would the trade value and economic welfare change? This paper simulates and analyses the mutual effects of China-South Korea and China-Australia FTAs and the enlarging TPP using the computable general equilibrium model. The major conclusions drawn suggest that China-South Korea and China-Australia FTAs will significantly offset the TPP’s negative effect on China’s foreign trade. If China is not included, the U.S. economic benefit from the TPP will be limited. The economic welfare for a country like Australia, which joined both the bilateral FTA and the TPP, will be increased the most. In the long run, China joining the TPP would be the most beneficial decision for its national interest. However, if the TPP cannot be approved by the US congress, the U.S.’s economic indicators and export would be decreasing sharply. China’s economy and export will benefit from FTAs.

scholarly journals The Collapse of the Appellate Body as a Determining Factor of the WTO’s Future

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 238-255
Author(s):  
Hryhorii M. Kalachyhin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Regulation ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
Shifting Balance ◽  
Wto Appellate Body ◽  
The U.S

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is one of the leading institutions involved in global economic regulation. Its purposes are to ensure multilateral cooperation on the liberalization of international trade, harmonize existing standards and requirements, and peacefully resolve trade disputes between countries. Since 11 December 2019, dispute resolution has been handicapped due to the consistent blocking of the appointment of members to the WTO Appellate Body (AB) by the United States. This has reduced the multilateral trading system’s (MTS) predictability and threatens its final decay. In this article, the fundamental and formal causes of the collapse are described, and its circumvention mechanisms and effectiveness are discussed. At the same time, an assessment is given of the possibility to overcome the collapse in 2021, considering the change of the U.S. president and other events. Special attention is paid to Russia’s position and its current and potential losses. Finally, the issue of dispute resolution through regional trade agreements is proposed for discussion. The fundamental reasons for the collapse were the shifting balance of power in the world order and the WTO’s inflexibility in adjusting the rulebook and its procedures. The main reasons for the U.S.’ dissatisfaction are objective but based on formalities; the blockage of the AB is an overreaction. Moreover, the U.S.’ position on this issue has not changed with the new president. As a result, there is abuse of the current situation as WTO members file appeals “into the void.” Existing tools to circumvent the collapse are partial and not yet popular among WTO members. Russia needs to resume the AB’s work to complete previously started high-profile disputes and to defend its interests in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document