What Does the Political Economy Literature on Trade Policy (Not) Tell UsThat We Ought To Know?
AbstractThree questions lie at the core of the large and distinguished literature on the political economy of trade policy. First, why is international trade not free? Second, why are trade policies universally biased against (rather than in favor of) trade? Third, what are the determinants of the variation in protection levels across industries, countries, and institutional contexts? These questions are handled only imperfectly by the existing literature. Current models treat trade policy as a redistributive tool, but do not explain why it emerges in political equilibrium in preference over more direct policy instruments. Further, existing models do not generate a bias against trade, implying that pro-trade interventions are as likely as trade-restricting interventions. The greatest contribution of the political economy literature may lie in developing a better grasp of normative economic analysis--that is, in helping design policies, rules, and institutions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 4870.
Date of creation: Sep 1994
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Rodrik, Dani, 1994. "What does the Political Economy Literature on Trade Policy (Not) Tell Us That We Ought to Know?," CEPR Discussion Papers 1039, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Gil S. Epstein & Shmuel Nitzan, 2003.
"Political culture and monopoly price determination,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-19, 08.
- Gil S. Epstein & Shmuel Nitzan, 2002. "Political Culture and Monopoly Price Determination," CESifo Working Paper Series 646, CESifo Group Munich.
- Figueroa, Enrique E., 1996. "The Competitiveness of Mexican and Caribbean Basin Horticultural Products in the U.S. Market," Staff Papers 121181, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
- Scott Bradford, 2000. "Rents, Votes, and Protection: Explaining the Structure of Trade Barriers Across Industries," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1717, Econometric Society.
- Pravin Krishna & Devashish Mitra, 2003. "Reciprocated Unilateralism in Trade Policy: An Interest-Group Approach," NBER Working Papers 9631, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bagwell, K. & Staiger, R.W., 1996.
"Reciprocal Trade Liberalization,"
9602, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1996. "Reciprocal Trade Liberalization," NBER Working Papers 5488, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1996. "Reciprocal Trade Liberalization," Discussion Papers 1150, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Sturzenegger, Federico, 1995. "Endogenous learning and trade policy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 429-433, October.
- Joseph F. Francois & Will Martin, 1998. "Commercial Policy Uncertainty, the Expected Cost of Protection, and Market Access," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-059/2, Tinbergen Institute.
- Piazolo, Daniel, 1995. "The impact of regionalism on the multilateral trading order: French tariff bargaining in the Uruguay Round," Kiel Working Papers 705, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Karp, Larry, 1995. "The Direction and Timing of Agricultural Trade Refonn in Central and East Europe," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9z61f67x, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
- Marcel Vaillant, 1998. "Endogenous number of lobby groups in a specific factor trade model," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0198, Department of Economics - dECON.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.