IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/ecoint/0801.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systemic Analysis of Trade Liberalisation: Policy Entreprenuership and Behavioural Variables in a Two-Legal Game Framework

Author

Listed:
  • TROFIMOV, Ivan

    (Kolej Yayasan Saad (KYS) Business School, Ayer Keroh, Malaysia)

Abstract

This paper presents a synthetic framework for the analysis of bilateral trade liberalisation process. It extends usual two-level game model (allowing interplay between domestic trade policy and GATT/WTO negotiation), and incorporates policy entrepreneurship processes (leadership, recombination, consensus-building), behavioural variables (intensity of interest in policy issue, attitudes towards gains and losses and cooperation), as well as systemic forces behind protectionist policies. The factors that determine the path, timing and outcome of the trade policy negotiation are tied in a formal model. The results point to the complementarity and mutual dependence of the factors, and the necessity to simultaneously attend to them during negotiation process. We also show that the success of trade liberalisation hinges upon readiness of the policy system for reform and prior exercise of advocacy and consensus building. Un’analisi sistemica della liberalizzazione del commercio: politica imprenditoriale e variabili comportamentali in un modello di giochi a due livelli Questo studio propone un modello sintetico per l’analisi del processo bilaterale di liberalizzazione del commercio. Estende il modello dei giochi a due livelli (consentendo l’interazione tra politiche di commercio interno e negoziazioni GATT/WTO) e incorpora i processi imprenditoriali (leadership, ricombinazione, ricerca del consenso), variabili di comportamento (livello di interesse verso i problemi politici, attitudine verso i guadagni o le perdite e la cooperazione), così come forze sistemiche al di là delle politiche protezioniste. I fattori che determinano il percorso, la tempistica e il risultato delle negoziazioni commerciali sono collegati in un modello formale. I risultati indicano che i fattori sono complementari e dipendenti uno dall’altro e che è necessario prenderli in considerazione simultaneamente durante il processo di negoziazione. Vi sono inoltre evidenze che il successo della liberalizzazione del commercio dipende dalla prontezza del sistema politico ad effettuare riforme, ad esercitare azioni di difesa e di ricerca del consenso.

Suggested Citation

  • TROFIMOV, Ivan, 2017. "Systemic Analysis of Trade Liberalisation: Policy Entreprenuership and Behavioural Variables in a Two-Legal Game Framework," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 70(2), pages 217-244.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0801
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iei1946.it/upload/rivista_articoli/allegati/78_trofimovric210417.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kuran, Timur, 1988. "The tenacious past: Theories of personal and collective conservatism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 143-171, September.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "Trade Wars and Trade Talks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 675-708, August.
    3. Israel M. Kirzner, 1997. "Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian Approach," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 60-85, March.
    4. Francois, Abel, 2003. "The Political Entrepreneur and the Coordination of the Political Process: A Market Process Perspective of the Political Market," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 16(2-3), pages 153-168, September.
    5. Michael Wohlgemuth, 2000. "Political entrepreneurship and bidding for political monopoly," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 273-295.
    6. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/8523 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Cornelia Woll, 2006. "Lobbying in the European Union: From Sui Generis to a Comparative Perspective," Post-Print hal-01021182, HAL.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Dani Rodrik, 1992. "The Limits of Trade Policy Reform in Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 87-105, Winter.
    10. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    11. Francesco Parisi, 1998. "The Constitutional and Political Economy of Trade Protection," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 67-79, January.
    12. Carsten Herrmann-Pillath, 2006. "Reciprocity and the hidden constitution of world trade," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 133-163, September.
    13. Pollack, Mark A., 1997. "Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 99-134, January.
    14. Peter Moser, 1989. "Toward an Open World Order: A Constitutional Economics Approach," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 9(1), pages 133-147, Spring/Su.
    15. Mayer, Frederick W., 1992. "Managing domestic differences in international negotiations: the strategic use of internal side-payments," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(4), pages 793-818, October.
    16. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/8523 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Trofimov, Ivan D., 2017. "International policy entrepreneurship and production of international public goods: the case of multilateral trade regime," MPRA Paper 80819, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ivan D. TROFIMOV, 2017. "International policy entrepreneurship and production of international public goods: the case of multilateral trade regime," Journal of Economics Library, KSP Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 473-501, December.
    3. Trofimov, Ivan D., 2017. "Political economy of trade protection and liberalization: in search of agency-based and holistic framework of policy change," MPRA Paper 79504, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Hederer, Christian, 2007. "Political Entrepreneurship and Institutional Change: an Evolutionary Approach," MPRA Paper 8249, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Barbara Dluhosch & Nikolai Ziegler, 2011. "The paradox of weakness in the politics of trade integration," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 325-354, December.
    6. Trofimov, Ivan, 2017. "Entrepreneurship and policy dynamics: a theoretical framework," MPRA Paper 79497, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. de Gorter, Harry, 2008. "Explaining Inefficient Policy Instruments," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 48638, World Bank.
    8. Alan Richards & Nirvikar Singh, 2004. "No Easy Exit: Property Rights, Markets, and Negotiations over Water," Development and Comp Systems 0412011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Randall Morck & Lloyd Steier, 2005. "The Global History of Corporate Governance: An Introduction," NBER Chapters, in: A History of Corporate Governance around the World: Family Business Groups to Professional Managers, pages 1-64, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    11. Minhas Akbar & Ahsan Akbar & Petra Maresova & Minghui Yang & Hafiz Muhammad Arshad, 2020. "Unraveling the Bankruptcy Risk‒Return Paradox across the Corporate Life Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Helpman, E., 1995. "Politics and Trade Policy," Papers 30-95, Tel Aviv - the Sackler Institute of Economic Studies.
    13. Koichi Hamada & Shyam Sunder, 2005. "Information Asymmetry and the Problem of Transfers in Trade Negotiations and International Agencies," Working Papers 910, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    14. Philip Catney & John M Henneberry, 2016. "Public entrepreneurship and the politics of regeneration in multi-level governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1324-1343, November.
    15. Robert Pahre, 1998. "Reactions and Reciprocity," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(4), pages 467-492, August.
    16. Barbara Dluhosch & Stefanie Krause, 2013. "Diversity and the disinterest in trade liberalization: on the prospects of self-enforcing cooperation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 455-475, April.
    17. Elert, Niklas & Henrekson, Magnus, 2021. "Innovative Entrepreneurship as a Collaborative Effort: An Institutional Framework," Foundations and Trends(R) in Entrepreneurship, now publishers, vol. 17(4), pages 330-435, June.
    18. Antràs, Pol & Padró i Miquel, Gerard, 2011. "Foreign influence and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 135-148, July.
    19. Koichi Hamada & Shyam Sunder, 2005. "Information Asymmetry and the Problem of Transfers in Trade Negotiations and International Agencies," Working Papers 910, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    20. Paul Schure & Amy Verdun, 2008. "Legislative Bargaining in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(4), pages 459-486, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy Entrepreneurship; Two-Level Games; Trade Policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0801. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Angela Procopio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cacogit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.