A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat?
Over the past decade, government trade and finance ministries have increasingly turned toward negotiating bilateral and regional trading arrangements, and away from negotiations in multilateral forums like the WTO. There are several reasons for this shift, including changes in the global political e...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of international economic law 2007-09, Vol.10 (3), p.571-583 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 583 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 571 |
container_title | Journal of international economic law |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Abbott, Frederick M. |
description | Over the past decade, government trade and finance ministries have increasingly turned toward negotiating bilateral and regional trading arrangements, and away from negotiations in multilateral forums like the WTO. There are several reasons for this shift, including changes in the global political environment and negotiating obstacles encountered by the multinational business community at the multilateral level. This shift appears to be an embedded phenomenon. Positive and negative aspects of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) are in evidence. Trade creation-trade diversion economic analysis suggests the results may be net global welfare enhancing, although such analysis does not readily assess distributional effects. The global economy is enjoying a period of sustained-and widely distributed-economic growth, suggesting that the PTA phenomenon is not an immediate economic threat. On the negative side, the PTAs lead to administrative complexity, and may be somewhat destabilizing as businesses are encouraged to relocate. Some countries may suffer if left out, but this risk is ameliorated by the wide availability of potential negotiating partners. The PTA negotiating environment strongly favors powerful economic actors like the United States and European Union, which are largely dictating terms to developing (and developed) countries. Developing countries, particularly the less economically powerful, are losing autonomous decision-making authority. The consequences of this are difficult to quantify, and may raise questions better attuned to moral philosophers than economists. The WTO continues on its way, relegated to a less central status. A return to the WTO might reinvigorate the role of less powerful actors, but such return does not appear an immediate prospect. The PTA phenomenon, on balance, does not appear aggressively threatening. We may, however, be underestimating the positive role of multilateralism. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/jiel/jgm021 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_oup_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36861016</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><informt_id>10.3316/agispt.20073716</informt_id><oup_id>10.1093/jiel/jgm021</oup_id><sourcerecordid>1328469701</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-b7139561aec13e836e739128d730bf91531151fb5ee65b03bf45a5f4d2245c3d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kDtPxDAQhCMEEs-KP2BR0KCAN2s7CQ2C4ykhKDhqy0k2h09JHGyfEP-eOw4aCqpdaT_NzkySHAI_BV7i2dxSdzaf9TyDjWQHhBIp5rLYXO6oyhQ5iu1kN4Q555ALgJ3k4pI90Qe7dr0dzBDZ1JuG2MtItaXAbnryMwrn7CGwK9uZSN50NvTMsOmbJxMv9pOt1nSBDn7mXvJ6ezOd3KePz3cPk8vHtBa5iGmVA5ZSgaEakApUlGMJWdHkyKu2BIkAEtpKEilZcaxaIY1sRZNlQtbY4F5yvNYdvXtfUIi6t6GmrjMDuUXQqAoFHNQSPPoDzt3CD0tvOoMCuMqyFXSyhmrvQvDU6tHb3vhPDVyvmtSrJvW6ySV9u6Z9b6M2MxvGqN9iHINuTDTaDq37Pjk_042zKxFEUL9oxnmO-be3nxBuMf778QuK_orS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>218106226</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat?</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Abbott, Frederick M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Abbott, Frederick M.</creatorcontrib><description>Over the past decade, government trade and finance ministries have increasingly turned toward negotiating bilateral and regional trading arrangements, and away from negotiations in multilateral forums like the WTO. There are several reasons for this shift, including changes in the global political environment and negotiating obstacles encountered by the multinational business community at the multilateral level. This shift appears to be an embedded phenomenon. Positive and negative aspects of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) are in evidence. Trade creation-trade diversion economic analysis suggests the results may be net global welfare enhancing, although such analysis does not readily assess distributional effects. The global economy is enjoying a period of sustained-and widely distributed-economic growth, suggesting that the PTA phenomenon is not an immediate economic threat. On the negative side, the PTAs lead to administrative complexity, and may be somewhat destabilizing as businesses are encouraged to relocate. Some countries may suffer if left out, but this risk is ameliorated by the wide availability of potential negotiating partners. The PTA negotiating environment strongly favors powerful economic actors like the United States and European Union, which are largely dictating terms to developing (and developed) countries. Developing countries, particularly the less economically powerful, are losing autonomous decision-making authority. The consequences of this are difficult to quantify, and may raise questions better attuned to moral philosophers than economists. The WTO continues on its way, relegated to a less central status. A return to the WTO might reinvigorate the role of less powerful actors, but such return does not appear an immediate prospect. The PTA phenomenon, on balance, does not appear aggressively threatening. We may, however, be underestimating the positive role of multilateralism.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-3034</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-3758</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/jiel/jgm021</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Bilateral relations ; Business community ; Economic theory ; INTERNATIONAL TRADE ; Most favored nation clause ; Multilateralism ; Multinational corporations ; Negotiations ; North American Free Trade Agreement ; Political power ; Politics ; Studies ; Threats ; Trade agreements ; Trade policy ; Trade relations ; WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION ; World Trade Organization</subject><ispartof>Journal of international economic law, 2007-09, Vol.10 (3), p.571-583</ispartof><rights>Oxford University Press 2007, all rights reserved 2007</rights><rights>Oxford University Press 2007, all rights reserved</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-b7139561aec13e836e739128d730bf91531151fb5ee65b03bf45a5f4d2245c3d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1578,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Abbott, Frederick M.</creatorcontrib><title>A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat?</title><title>Journal of international economic law</title><description>Over the past decade, government trade and finance ministries have increasingly turned toward negotiating bilateral and regional trading arrangements, and away from negotiations in multilateral forums like the WTO. There are several reasons for this shift, including changes in the global political environment and negotiating obstacles encountered by the multinational business community at the multilateral level. This shift appears to be an embedded phenomenon. Positive and negative aspects of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) are in evidence. Trade creation-trade diversion economic analysis suggests the results may be net global welfare enhancing, although such analysis does not readily assess distributional effects. The global economy is enjoying a period of sustained-and widely distributed-economic growth, suggesting that the PTA phenomenon is not an immediate economic threat. On the negative side, the PTAs lead to administrative complexity, and may be somewhat destabilizing as businesses are encouraged to relocate. Some countries may suffer if left out, but this risk is ameliorated by the wide availability of potential negotiating partners. The PTA negotiating environment strongly favors powerful economic actors like the United States and European Union, which are largely dictating terms to developing (and developed) countries. Developing countries, particularly the less economically powerful, are losing autonomous decision-making authority. The consequences of this are difficult to quantify, and may raise questions better attuned to moral philosophers than economists. The WTO continues on its way, relegated to a less central status. A return to the WTO might reinvigorate the role of less powerful actors, but such return does not appear an immediate prospect. The PTA phenomenon, on balance, does not appear aggressively threatening. We may, however, be underestimating the positive role of multilateralism.</description><subject>Bilateral relations</subject><subject>Business community</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>INTERNATIONAL TRADE</subject><subject>Most favored nation clause</subject><subject>Multilateralism</subject><subject>Multinational corporations</subject><subject>Negotiations</subject><subject>North American Free Trade Agreement</subject><subject>Political power</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Threats</subject><subject>Trade agreements</subject><subject>Trade policy</subject><subject>Trade relations</subject><subject>WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION</subject><subject>World Trade Organization</subject><issn>1369-3034</issn><issn>1464-3758</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kDtPxDAQhCMEEs-KP2BR0KCAN2s7CQ2C4ykhKDhqy0k2h09JHGyfEP-eOw4aCqpdaT_NzkySHAI_BV7i2dxSdzaf9TyDjWQHhBIp5rLYXO6oyhQ5iu1kN4Q555ALgJ3k4pI90Qe7dr0dzBDZ1JuG2MtItaXAbnryMwrn7CGwK9uZSN50NvTMsOmbJxMv9pOt1nSBDn7mXvJ6ezOd3KePz3cPk8vHtBa5iGmVA5ZSgaEakApUlGMJWdHkyKu2BIkAEtpKEilZcaxaIY1sRZNlQtbY4F5yvNYdvXtfUIi6t6GmrjMDuUXQqAoFHNQSPPoDzt3CD0tvOoMCuMqyFXSyhmrvQvDU6tHb3vhPDVyvmtSrJvW6ySV9u6Z9b6M2MxvGqN9iHINuTDTaDq37Pjk_042zKxFEUL9oxnmO-be3nxBuMf778QuK_orS</recordid><startdate>20070901</startdate><enddate>20070901</enddate><creator>Abbott, Frederick M.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070901</creationdate><title>A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat?</title><author>Abbott, Frederick M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-b7139561aec13e836e739128d730bf91531151fb5ee65b03bf45a5f4d2245c3d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Bilateral relations</topic><topic>Business community</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>INTERNATIONAL TRADE</topic><topic>Most favored nation clause</topic><topic>Multilateralism</topic><topic>Multinational corporations</topic><topic>Negotiations</topic><topic>North American Free Trade Agreement</topic><topic>Political power</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Threats</topic><topic>Trade agreements</topic><topic>Trade policy</topic><topic>Trade relations</topic><topic>WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION</topic><topic>World Trade Organization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Abbott, Frederick M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of international economic law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Abbott, Frederick M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of international economic law</jtitle><date>2007-09-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>571</spage><epage>583</epage><pages>571-583</pages><issn>1369-3034</issn><eissn>1464-3758</eissn><abstract>Over the past decade, government trade and finance ministries have increasingly turned toward negotiating bilateral and regional trading arrangements, and away from negotiations in multilateral forums like the WTO. There are several reasons for this shift, including changes in the global political environment and negotiating obstacles encountered by the multinational business community at the multilateral level. This shift appears to be an embedded phenomenon. Positive and negative aspects of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) are in evidence. Trade creation-trade diversion economic analysis suggests the results may be net global welfare enhancing, although such analysis does not readily assess distributional effects. The global economy is enjoying a period of sustained-and widely distributed-economic growth, suggesting that the PTA phenomenon is not an immediate economic threat. On the negative side, the PTAs lead to administrative complexity, and may be somewhat destabilizing as businesses are encouraged to relocate. Some countries may suffer if left out, but this risk is ameliorated by the wide availability of potential negotiating partners. The PTA negotiating environment strongly favors powerful economic actors like the United States and European Union, which are largely dictating terms to developing (and developed) countries. Developing countries, particularly the less economically powerful, are losing autonomous decision-making authority. The consequences of this are difficult to quantify, and may raise questions better attuned to moral philosophers than economists. The WTO continues on its way, relegated to a less central status. A return to the WTO might reinvigorate the role of less powerful actors, but such return does not appear an immediate prospect. The PTA phenomenon, on balance, does not appear aggressively threatening. We may, however, be underestimating the positive role of multilateralism.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/jiel/jgm021</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1369-3034 |
ispartof | Journal of international economic law, 2007-09, Vol.10 (3), p.571-583 |
issn | 1369-3034 1464-3758 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36861016 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current) |
subjects | Bilateral relations Business community Economic theory INTERNATIONAL TRADE Most favored nation clause Multilateralism Multinational corporations Negotiations North American Free Trade Agreement Political power Politics Studies Threats Trade agreements Trade policy Trade relations WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION World Trade Organization |
title | A New Dominant Trade Species Emerges: Is Bilateralism a Threat? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T22%3A39%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_oup_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20New%20Dominant%20Trade%20Species%20Emerges:%20Is%20Bilateralism%20a%20Threat?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20international%20economic%20law&rft.au=Abbott,%20Frederick%20M.&rft.date=2007-09-01&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=571&rft.epage=583&rft.pages=571-583&rft.issn=1369-3034&rft.eissn=1464-3758&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/jiel/jgm021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_oup_p%3E1328469701%3C/proquest_oup_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=218106226&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_informt_id=10.3316/agispt.20073716&rft_oup_id=10.1093/jiel/jgm021&rfr_iscdi=true |