IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v23y2013i2p455-475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diversity and the disinterest in trade liberalization: on the prospects of self-enforcing cooperation

Author

Listed:
  • Barbara Dluhosch
  • Stefanie Krause

Abstract

International economic order, including the rules of the game for trade, usually suffers from enforcement problems. We examine the prospects of self-enforcing cooperation as trade relationships evolve. It turns out that factor differentials and specificities are of utmost importance. In fact, prospects of self-enforcing cooperation are the lower the more diverse the countries are on that score. Differences may even result in countries showing an outright disinterest in trade liberalization. Notably, this result also holds in a recurrent, that is, in an evolutionary setting that otherwise induces cooperation in trade liberalization with self-enforcing properties. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:23:y:2013:i:2:p:455-475
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-012-0267-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00191-012-0267-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00191-012-0267-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    2. Eicher, Theo S. & Henn, Christian, 2011. "In search of WTO trade effects: Preferential trade agreements promote trade strongly, but unevenly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 137-153, March.
    3. Hayek, F. A., 2012. "Hayek on Hayek," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226321202 edited by Kresge, Stephen & Wenar, Leif, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    6. Ronald W. Jones & Roy J. Ruffin, 2008. "Trade and Wages: a Deeper Investigation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 234-249, May.
    7. Goldstein, Judith L. & Rivers, Douglas & Tomz, Michael, 2007. "Institutions in International Relations: Understanding the Effects of the GATT and the WTO on World Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(1), pages 37-67, January.
    8. Klein, Daniel & Orsborn, Aaron, 2009. "Concatenate coordination and mutual coordination," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-187, October.
    9. Anne O. Krueger, 1999. "Are Preferential Trading Arrangements Trade-Liberalizing or Protectionist?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 105-124, Fall.
    10. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2002. "Darwinism in economics: from analogy to ontology," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 259-281.
    11. Andrew K. Rose, 2004. "Do We Really Know That the WTO Increases Trade?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 98-114, March.
    12. Bruce Caldwell, 2004. "Hayekian evolution reconsidered: a reply to Hodgson," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 301-305, March.
    13. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2004. "Hayekian evolution reconsidered: a response to Caldwell," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 291-300, March.
    14. Christopher S. P. Magee & Stephen P. Magee, 2008. "The United States is a Small Country in World Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 990-1004, November.
    15. Stefano Fiori, 2006. "The emergence of institutions in Hayek’s theory: two views or one?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 49-61, March.
    16. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2011. "What Do Trade Negotiators Negotiate About? Empirical Evidence from the World Trade Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1238-1273, June.
    17. Carsten Herrmann-Pillath, 2006. "Reciprocity and the hidden constitution of world trade," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 133-163, September.
    18. Caldwell, Bruce, 2001. "Hodgson on Hayek: A Critique," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 539-553, July.
    19. Daniel Klein, 1997. "Convention, Social Order, and the Two Coordinations," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 319-335, December.
    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. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    2. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    3. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Rose, Andrew K., 2004. "Do WTO members have more liberal trade policy?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 209-235, July.
    5. Rodney D. Ludema & Anna Maria Mayda, 2010. "Do Terms-of-Trade Effects Matter for Trade Agreements? Evidence from WTO Countries," Development Working Papers 293, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
    6. Ralph Ossa, 2011. "A "New Trade" Theory of GATT/WTO Negotiations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 122-152.
    7. Ludema, Rodney D. & Mayda, Anna Maria, 2009. "Do countries free ride on MFN?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 137-150, April.
    8. Annicchiarico, Barbara & Marvasi, Enrico, 2019. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition: Beyond the CES," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    9. Liebman, Benjamin H. & Reynolds, Kara M., 2022. "Casualties of trade wars," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    10. Nuno Limão, 2016. "Preferential Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 22138, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Matthew T. Cole, 2011. "Optimal tariffs with FDI : the evidence," Working Papers 201121, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    12. Joseph S Shapiro, 2021. "The Environmental Bias of Trade Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(2), pages 831-886.
    13. Sheldon, Ian M. & Chow, Daniel C.K. & McGuire, William, 2017. "Trade Liberalization and Institutional Constraints on Moves to Protectionism: Multilateralism vs. Regionalism," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266305, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2014. "Emerging economies, trade policy, and macroeconomic shocks," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 261-273.
    15. Javorcik, Beata S. & Narciso, Gaia, 2017. "WTO accession and tariff evasion," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 59-71.
    16. Kato, Hayato, 2015. "Lobbying and Tax Competition in an Agglomeration Economy: A Reverse Home Market Effect," CCES Discussion Paper Series 56, Center for Research on Contemporary Economic Systems, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    17. Jagdambe, Subhash & Kannan, Elumalai, 2020. "Effects of ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement on agricultural trade: The gravity model approach," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    18. Cole, Matthew T. & Lake, James & Zissimos, Ben, 2021. "Contesting an international trade agreement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    19. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "Duration of membership in the world trade organization and investment-oriented remittances inflows," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 258-277.
    20. Didier Laussel & Michel Le Breton, 2005. ""Favors" for Sale: Strategic Analysis of a Simple Menu Auction with Adverse Selection," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 6(1), pages 53-73, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade liberalization; Protectionism; Retaliation; Evolution; Cooperation; F13; F50; O19;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F50 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - General
    • O19 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - International Linkages to Development; Role of International Organizations

    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:spr:joevec:v:23:y:2013:i:2:p:455-475. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.