IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v63y2019i5p1253-1282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protecting Workers Abroad and Industries at Home: Rights-based Conditionality in Trade Preference Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Emilie M. Hafner-Burton
  • Layna Mosley
  • Robert Galantucci

Abstract

A growing number of developed country governments link good governance, including human rights, to developing countries’ access to aid, trade, and investment. We consider whether governments enforce these conditions sincerely, in response to rights violations, or whether such conditions might instead be used as a veil for protectionist policies, motivated by domestic concerns about import competition. We do so via an examination of the world’s most important unilateral trade preference program, the US Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), which includes worker rights as one criterion for program access. We argue that the two-tiered structure of the GSP privileges some domestic interests at one level, while disadvantaging them at the other. Using a new data set on all US GSP beneficiary countries and sanctioning measures from 1986 to 2013, we demonstrate that labor rights outcomes play a role in the maintenance of country-level trade benefits and that import competition does not condition the application of rights-based criteria at this level. At the same, however, the US government does not consider worker rights in the elements (at the country-product level) of the program that have the greatest material impact. The result is a situation in which the US government talks somewhat sincerely at the country level in its rights-based conditionality, but its behavior at the country-product level cheapens this talk.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Layna Mosley & Robert Galantucci, 2019. "Protecting Workers Abroad and Industries at Home: Rights-based Conditionality in Trade Preference Programs," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(5), pages 1253-1282, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:63:y:2019:i:5:p:1253-1282
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002718783236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002718783236
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002718783236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, Robert E & Magee, Christopher S, 2000. "Is Trade Policy for Sale? Congressional Voting on Recent Trade Bills," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 105(1-2), pages 79-101, October.
    2. Lisa Lechner, 2016. "The domestic battle over the design of non-trade issues in preferential trade agreements," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(5), pages 840-871, September.
    3. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    4. Isao Kamata, 2015. "Labor Clauses in Regional Trade Agreements and Effects on Labor Conditions: An Empirical Analysis," Discussion papers e-14-019, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    5. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    6. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman & Philipp Kircher, 2017. "Matching, Sorting, and the Distributional Effects of International Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(1), pages 224-264.
    7. James M. DeVault, 1996. "Political Pressure and the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 35-46, Winter.
    8. Emily Blanchard & Shushanik Hakobyan, 2015. "The US Generalised System of Preferences in Principle and Practice," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 399-424, March.
    9. Unknown, 2014. "Media Coverage 2014," 2014: Ethics, Efficiency and Food Security: Feeding the 9 Billion, Well, 26-28 August 2014 225573, Crawford Fund.
    10. Daniel Lederman & Çaglar Özden, 2007. "Geopolitical Interests And Preferential Access To U.S. Markets," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 235-258, July.
    11. James Devault, 1996. "Competitive Need Limits And The U.S. Generalized System Of Preference," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(4), pages 58-66, October.
    12. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., 2005. "Trading Human Rights: How Preferential Trade Agreements Influence Government Repression," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(3), pages 593-629, July.
    13. Goldstein, Judith & Gulotty, Robert, 2014. "America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 263-295, April.
    14. Gabriele Spilker & Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "The impact of preferential trade agreements on governmental repression revisited," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 343-361, September.
    15. Gil-Pareja, Salvador & Llorca-Vivero, Rafael & Martínez-Serrano, José Antonio, 2014. "Do nonreciprocal preferential trade agreements increase beneficiaries' exports?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 291-304.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sandra Polaski, 2022. "The strategy and politics of linking trade and labor standards: an overview of issues and approaches," Chapters, in: Handbook on Globalisation and Labour Standards, chapter 11, pages 203-225, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Céline Carrère & Marcelo Olarreaga & Damian Raess, 2022. "Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 453-483, July.
    3. Kolcava, Dennis & Smith, E. Keith & Bernauer, Thomas, 2022. "Public Preference Formation Towards Sustainable Global Supply Chains Policy," OSF Preprints 2hez9, Center for Open Science.
    4. Guasti, Alessandro & Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias, 2022. "Has global trade competition really led to a race to the bottom in labor standards?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113752, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Damian Raess & Andreas Dür & Dora Sari, 2018. "Protecting labor rights in preferential trade agreements: The role of trade unions, left governments, and skilled labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 143-162, June.
    2. Céline Carrère & Marcelo Olarreaga & Damian Raess, 2022. "Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 453-483, July.
    3. Aaditya Mattoo & Nadia Rocha & Michele Ruta, 2020. "Handbook of Deep Trade Agreements," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 34055, December.
    4. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    5. Pushan Dutt & Devashish Mitra, 2016. "Political Ideology And Endogenous Trade Policy: An Empirical Investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Policy Theory, Evidence and Applications, chapter 5, pages 95-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Fangjin Ye, 2020. "The impact of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) on collective labor rights in developing countries," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 899-921, October.
    7. Emily Blanchard & Xenia Matschke, 2015. "U.S. Multinationals and Preferential Market Access," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(4), pages 839-854, October.
    8. Kim, Dong-Hyeon & Lin, Shu-Chin, 2023. "Income inequality, inflation and financial development," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 468-487.
    9. Gunitsky, Seva, 2014. "From Shocks to Waves: Hegemonic Transitions and Democratization in the Twentieth Century," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(3), pages 561-597, July.
    10. Yamlaksira S. Getachew & Roger Fon & Elie Chrysostome, 2023. "On the location choices of African multinational enterprises: Do supranational economic institutions matter?," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(4), pages 453-490, December.
    11. Jha, Priyaranjan & Gozgor, Giray, 2019. "Globalization and taxation: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 296-315.
    12. Lauren L. Ferry & Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Christina J. Schneider, 2020. "Catch me if you care: International development organizations and national corruption," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 767-792, October.
    13. Shushanik Hakobyan, 2017. "Export Competitiveness of Developing Countries and US Trade Policy," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1405-1429, July.
    14. Jieun Lee & Iain Osgood, 2018. "Exports, Jobs, Growth! Congressional Hearings on US Trade Agreements," Working Papers 667, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    15. Callaghan, Christian William, 2021. "Consequences of deindustrialisation for globalisation: Insights for international business," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(3).
    16. Abel Bojar, 2015. "Intra-governmental bargaining and political budget cycles in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 90-115, March.
    17. Jandhyala, Srividya, 2015. "International and domestic dynamics of intellectual property protection," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 284-293.
    18. Facundo Albornoz & Irene Brambilla & Emanuel Ornelas, 2021. "Firm export responses to tariff hikes," CEP Discussion Papers dp1783, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. Céline CARRERE & Marcelo OLARREAGA & Damian RAESS, 2017. "Labor Clauses in Trade Agreements: worker protection or protectionism?," Working Papers P200, FERDI.
    20. Jose Luis Castillo Mezarina, 2021. "The impact of free trade agreements in national markets: Evidence from the telecommunications sector in Latin America," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 860-903, September.

    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:sae:jocore:v:63:y:2019:i:5:p:1253-1282. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.