The World Trading System at Risk. By Jagdish Bhagwati. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991. 156p. $16.95. - Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate. By Otis L. GrahamJr., Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992. 370p. $29.95. - Parallel Politics: Economic Policymaking in Japan and the United States. Edited by Samuel Kernell. Washington: Brookings Institution, 1991. 390p. $36.95 cloth, $15.95 paper.

1992 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 1098-1100
Author(s):  
John Zysman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Industrial Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Harvard University ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Brookings Institution ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
The World ◽  
World Trading System

scholarly journals Arising of Trade Disputes among the G20: Evaluation of US-China Trade Relations in the Context of World Trading System

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Yagoub Elryah ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Large Body ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
China Trade ◽  
The World ◽  
World Trading System

Trade policy among the G20 has emerged as one of the challenges the group faces during the last decade after the 2008 global financial crisis. This paper aims at analyzing the current trade disputes between China and the United States and the efforts the G20 has taken to settle these disputes. The fundamental questions this study attempts to answer are as follows: (1) what the US–China trade dispute means for the world trading system? (2) what the G20 can do to prevent destructive trade wars? We confront this view by critically examining a large body of evidence on the effects of trade policy on economically important outcomes. We begin with a discussion of the role of G20 in stabilizing world economy. We show the G20’s recent economic and trade development challenges and measurements of trade policy and identification of its causal effects. We present the trade balance between the United States and China. We also illustrate the efforts made by the G20 in promoting the development of China–US trade cooperation. Data were collected from different sources. Data are collected from the World Bank, the World Trade Organization (WTO) publications, and the G20 summits’ reports. The results show that the United States has a trade deficit with China, and the global growth would be notably curtailed as investment and consumer spending fall back. The G20 should focus on supporting the WTO, being upfront about the mixed effects of trade and investment, and improving G20 measures to tackle protectionism.

scholarly journals Appellate Body Report onEU−Biodiesel: The Future of China's State Capitalism under the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
WEIHUAN ZHOU
Keyword(s):  
State Intervention ◽  
The Other ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Trading System ◽  
State Capitalism ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
World Trading System ◽  
Price Distortions ◽  
Antidumping Measures

AbstractChina's unique economic system poses increasing challenges to the world trading system and attracts growing academic and policy debate. WTO members have frequently resorted to antidumping measures in dealing with price distortions caused by the Chinese government's influence on the economy. The Appellate Body's decision in the recentEU–Biodieseldispute starts to remove the flexibility of condemning state intervention and price distortions under the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement through antidumping measures. This decision, read with the relevant WTO jurisprudence on the ‘ordinary course of trade’ test and subsidies, suggests that price distortions resulting from state intervention should be addressed under other WTO rules. Therefore, it is necessary for WTO members to shift their focus to, and explore the capacity of, the other rules to overcome the challenges arising from China's state capitalism.

scholarly journals Trade Wars: What do they mean? Why are they happening now? What are the costs?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaditya Mattoo ◽  
Robert W Staiger
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Multilateral Trading System ◽  
The World ◽  
Trade Wars

Abstract How should economists interpret current trade wars and the recent U.S. trade actions that have initiated them? In this paper we offer an interpretation of current U.S. trade actions that is at once more charitable and less forgiving than that typically offered by economic commentators. More charitable, because we argue that it is possible to see a logic to these actions: the United States is initiating a change from “rules-based” to “power-based” tariff bargaining and is selecting countries with which it runs bilateral trade deficits as the most suitable targets of its bargaining tariffs. Less forgiving, because the main costs of these trade tactics cannot be avoided even if they happen to “work” and deliver lower tariffs. Rather, we show that the main costs will arise from the use of the tactics themselves, and from the damage done by those tactics to the rules-based multilateral trading system and the longer-term interests of the United States and the rest of the world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document