IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/pbrief/pb13-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Crafting a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: What Can Be Done

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey J. Schott

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Cathleen Cimino

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

A comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has important implications for both US-EU bilateral trade and the world trading system. If successful, it could strengthen transatlantic economic relations while also spurring trade reforms that could reinvigorate flagging multilateral trade negotiations. Both sides want the TTIP to be a big deal covering all major components of the commercial relationship. They can achieve the pact's ambitious agenda by (1) broadly aligning their respective trade pacts with South Korea and (2) deepening market access commitments covering both tariff and nontariff barriers to trade in goods, agriculture, and services. KORUS and KOREU FTA precedents are instructive but will need to be supplemented or adjusted in three areas if the TTIP is to succeed: intellectual property issues, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, and the environment. In several other areas KORUS-KOREU differences should be easier to bridge, including services, investment, government procurement, and competition policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey J. Schott & Cathleen Cimino, 2013. "Crafting a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: What Can Be Done," Policy Briefs PB13-8, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb13-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/crafting-transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership-what-can-be-done
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keith E. Maskus, 2012. "Private Rights and Public Problems: The Global Economics of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 5072, October.
    2. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott, 2009. "Buy American: Bad for Jobs, Worse for Reputation," Policy Briefs PB09-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    3. Jeffrey J. Schott, 2010. "KORUS FTA 2.0: Assessing the Changes," Policy Briefs PB10-28, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    4. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & J. Bradford Jensen & Sherry Stephenson & Julia Muir & Martin Vieiro, 2012. "Framework for the International Services Agreement," Policy Briefs PB12-10, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    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. Jeffrey J. Schott & Minsoo Lee & Julia Muir, 2012. "Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations," Working Paper Series WP12-17, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    2. Bouet, Antoine & Laborde, David, 2008. "The potential cost of a failed Doha Round," Issue briefs 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Mercedes Campi & Marco Dueñas & Matteo Barigozzi & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2019. "Intellectual property rights, imitation, and development. The effect on cross-border mergers and acquisitions," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 230-256, February.
    4. Hong, T., 2021. "Revisiting the Trade Policy Uncertainty Index," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2174, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Kamal Saggi & Difei Geng, 2014. "The nature of innovative activity and the protection of intellectual property: a post TRIPS perspective from Asia," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 14-00003, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    6. Mario Larch & Wolfgang Lechthaler, 2011. "Why `Buy American' is a bad idea but politicians still like it," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(3), pages 838-858, August.
    7. Bouet, Antoine & Laborde, David, 2008. "The potential cost of a failed Doha Round:," Issue briefs 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    9. Keith E. Maskus & Lei Yang, 2018. "Domestic patent rights, access to technologies and the structure of exports," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 483-509, May.
    10. Mercedes Campi & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2021. "Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural Development: Evidence from a Worldwide Index of IPRs in Agriculture (1961-2018)," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(4), pages 650-668, April.
    11. Valentina Bosetti & Elena Verdolini, 2013. "Clean and Dirty International Technology Diffusion," Working Papers 2013.43, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Sauvé, Pierre, 2014. "Towards a plurilateral Trade in Services Agreement (TISA): Challenges and prospects," Papers 683, World Trade Institute.
    13. Mercedes Campi & Marco Duenas & Matteo Barigozzi & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2016. "Do Intellectual Property Rights Influence Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions ?," LEM Papers Series 2016/28, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Stefano Bolatto & Alireza Naghavi & Gianmarco Ottaviano & Katja Zajc Kejžar, 2023. "Intellectual property and the organization of the global value chain," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(359), pages 707-745, July.
    15. Keith E. Maskus, 2015. "Intellectual property in a globalizing world: issues for economic research," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 231-250, September.
    16. Antoine Bouet, 2010. "Assessing the potential cost of a failed Doha round," Larefi Working Papers 201001, Larefi, Université Bordeaux 4.
    17. Pamela Smith & Xiangwen Kong, 2022. "Intellectual property rights and trade: The exceptional case of GMOs," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 763-811, March.
    18. Paola Conconi & Giovanni Facchini & Maurizio Zanardi, 2012. "Fast-Track Authority and International Trade Negotiations," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 146-189, August.
    19. Jeffrey J. Schott, 2015. "Korea and the TPP: The Inevitable Partnership," Policy Briefs PB15-13, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    20. Belton M. Fleisher & William H. McGuire & Adam N. Smith & Mi Zhou, 2014. "Patent law, TRIPS, and economic growth: evidence from China," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 104-104, March.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:iie:pbrief:pb13-8. 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: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.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.