Doha in the Dumps: The Bilateral Option. Whither Canadian Trade Policy

Eurostudia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Dymond

Abstract This article takes Canadian trade politics in order to demonstrate that the mixture of multi- and bilateral negotiations is a solution just for yesterday’s problems. First the article provides an account of the present situation of the Doha Development Round. Second it discusses Canada’s interest in bilateral agreements before it analyzes the present conditions for international trade. The final section is dedicated to the political options resulting from that situation.

1989 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 119-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E Baldwin

International trade seems to be a subject where the advice of economists is routinely disregarded. Economists are nearly unanimous in their general opposition to protectionism, but the increase in U.S. protection in recent years in such sectors as automobiles, steel, textiles and apparel, machine tools, footwear and semiconductors demonstrates that economists lack political influence on trade policy. Two broad approaches have been developed to analyze the political economics of trade policy and the processes that generate protectionism. One approach emphasizes the economic self-interest of the political participants, while the other stresses the importance of the broad social concerns of voters and public officials. This paper outlines the nature of the two approaches, indicating how they can explain the above anomalies and other trade policy behavior, and concludes with observations about integrating the two frameworks, conducting further research, and making policy based on the analysis.


1996 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 689-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES E. ALT ◽  
JEFFRY FRIEDEN ◽  
MICHAEL J. GILLIGAN ◽  
DANI RODRIK ◽  
RONALD ROGOWSKI

A similar set of concepts has been central to the literatures on the formation of trade policy coalitions and the “new economics of institutions”: the political and economic consequences of the degree to which assets are specific to a particular economic activity. In this survey, the authors take the necessary first step of summarizing the main findings of these two literatures and then suggest ways in which the issue might be joined. In addition to providing a more coherent understanding of the findings of these two literatures and some new directions for them, the authors show that many puzzles remain in the field of trade politics—puzzles for which there are no appealing answers or, where there are answers, no strong evidence in support of them. This essay, then, in addition to being a theoretical review of the literature, puts forward an agenda for future study of international trade politics.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Rudolph ◽  
Franziska Quoss ◽  
Romain Buchs ◽  
Thomas Bernauer

The environmental impacts of international trade are met by both public backlash against trade liberalization and efforts at greening international trade. Because public support is essential to environmental and trade policy-making alike, we examine the trade-environment nexus from a public opinion perspective. We investigate whether negative attitudes towards trade are in fact fueled by concern over its environmental consequences. We argue that environmental concern affects how citizens evaluate the costs and benefits of trade, and that such evaluation is moderated by political ideology. Our empirical analysis relies on a population-based survey experiment and a large representative survey in a small open economy, Switzerland. We show that environmental concern (serenity) leads to decreasing (increasing) appreciation of and support for international trade, with different manifestations of trade skepticism on the political right and left. Relating to the debate over environmental footprints of consumption, we do not find that citizens care more about environmental damage at home than abroad. The main policy implication of our findings is that policy-makers should assign high priority to greening global supply chains if they wish to sustain public support for liberal international trade policy, and that the public follows informational cues on the environmental impacts of trade.


Author(s):  
Mary Anne Madeira

International trade and state efforts to liberalize or restrict trade generate very contentious politics. Trade creates winners and losers at the individual level, firm level, industry level, national level, and even regional level. It also generates conflict among transnational social groups, such as environmental advocacy organizations, human rights organizations, and transnational business alliances. Because of this complexity of the politics of international trade, scholars of international political economy (IPE) can focus on different levels of analysis and a variety of stages of the political decision-making process. Scholars agree that not only societal preferences but collective action problems, domestic institutions, and international factors all affect trade politics and policy outcomes. These aspects of trade politics together form the key influences on trade policy and whether it is liberal or protectionist in nature. Societal preferences constitute the initial inputs into the trade policy-making process. Understanding how different groups of economic actors within society win or lose from trade liberalization or protection is the first step toward understanding trade politics and trade policy outcomes. Once societal trade preferences are formed, they must be aggregated into cohesive pressure groups or grass-roots movements whose purpose is to influence trade policy. This is easier for some groups of actors to achieve than others. In lobbying government actors on policy, interest groups find that domestic institutions play an important role translating societal inputs into policy outputs. Policy-making institutions vary in the degree to which they are susceptible to special-interest lobbying versus the preferences of broader societal coalitions, and electoral rules and party structures also affect policy outcomes, with certain configurations creating a bias toward more protectionism or liberalization. In addition to these domestic-level influences on trade policy, IPE scholars have extensively studied the ways that international factors also affect trade policy outcomes such as the extent of liberalization and the content of what is liberalized (e.g., manufactures versus agricultural goods versus services). International factors such as the distribution of power, the character of international institutions and trade agreements (e.g., multilateral versus bilateral), transnational civil society and diffusion processes may be thought of as inputs into the policy-making process as well. Systemic conditions may constrain the types of policies that governments can adopt, or they may open the door to a range of possible policy outcomes that are nevertheless limited by the preferences of domestic societal actors.


2011 ◽  
pp. 118-138
Author(s):  
N. Ryzhova

The article deals with the incentives for increasing international trade centralization and restricting trade border regions openness in reformed economy. Two groups of incentives are determined in terms of new political economy approaches: fear of separatism and reluctance of income redistribution. The situation with the radical international trade reform in Russia, followed by correction of trade openness, illustrates key moments in the concepts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document