IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/bosecd/8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why is Trade Reform so Unpopular? On Status Quo Bias in Policy Reforms

Author

Listed:
  • Raquel Fernandez
  • Dani Rodrik

Abstract

Despite the well-known gains from trade, trade liberalization is politically one of the most contentious actions that a government can take. We propose and formalize a new argument, having to do with uncertainty, which is complementary to the usual explanations for why that is the case: many individuals will simply not know how they will fare under trade reform, and this can reduce support for a reform which would have been otherwise popular, even in the absence of risk aversion. We show that reforms that would have received adequate popular support ex post (i.e., which once enacted will last) may fail to carry the day ex ante, because of uncertainty regarding the distribution of gains and losses. Moreover, the role of uncertainty in determining the outcomes is not symmetric, since reforms that are initially rejected will continue to be so in the future while reforms that are initially accepted may find themselves reversed over time. We discuss empirical illustrations drawn from the experiences of South Korea, Chile and Turkey to provide support for the argument.

Suggested Citation

  • Raquel Fernandez & Dani Rodrik, 1990. "Why is Trade Reform so Unpopular? On Status Quo Bias in Policy Reforms," Boston University - Institute for Economic Development 8, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development.
  • Handle: RePEc:fth:bosecd:8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Policy uncertainty and private investment in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 229-242, October.
    2. Alesina, Alberto & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1170-1188, December.
    3. Anne O. Krueger, 1989. "Asymmetries in Policy Between Exportables and Import-Competing Goods," NBER Working Papers 2904, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    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. Alesina, Alberto & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1170-1188, December.
    2. Fernando Blumenschein, 1995. "The Positive Economics of Inflation in Brazil," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 26(4), pages 651-686, October.

    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. Urs Fischbacher & Simeon Schudy, 2014. "Reciprocity and resistance to comprehensive reform," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 411-428, September.
    2. Stephen Morris & Stephen Coate, 1999. "Policy Persistence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1327-1336, December.
    3. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & König, Philipp Johann, 2020. "Leaping into the dark: A theory of policy gambles," Discussion Papers 07/2020, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    4. Mehlum, Halvor, 2001. "Capital accumulation, unemployment, and self-fulfilling failure of economic reform," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 291-306, August.
    5. Jean Paul Azam & Robert Bates & Bruno Biais, 2009. "Political Predation And Economic Development," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 255-277, July.
    6. Joshua Aizenman & Ricardo Hausmann, 1994. "Why is Inflation Skewed? A Debt and Volatility Story," NBER Working Papers 4837, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Theocharis Grigoriadis & Friedrich Heinemann, 2013. "Origins of Reform Resistance and the Southern European Regime. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 20," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 46881, April.
    8. Corbo, Vittorio & Fischer, Stanley, 1995. "Structural adjustment, stabilization and policy reform: Domestic and international finance," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 44, pages 2845-2924, Elsevier.
    9. Friedrich Heinemann & Theocharis Grigoriadis, 2016. "Origins of reform resistance and the Southern European regime," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 661-691, November.
    10. Pastor, Manuel Jr. & Conroy, Michael E., 1995. "Distributional implications of macroeconomic policy: Theory and applications to El Salvador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(12), pages 2117-2131, December.
    11. Nadine Leiner-Killinger & Víctor López Pérez & Roger Stiegert & Giovanni Vitale, 2007. "Structural reforms in EMU and the role of monetary policy – a survey of the literature," Occasional Paper Series 66, European Central Bank.
    12. Joshua Aizenman, 2016. "International Coordination and Precautionary Policies," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 379-391, July.
    13. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2019. "Are World Leaders Loss Averse?," CESifo Working Paper Series 7763, CESifo.
    14. Hans Pitlik, 2004. "Institutionelle Voraussetzungen marktorientierter Reformen der Wirtschaftspolitik," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 240/2004, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    15. Jannils Łukasz, 2021. "The concept of political instability in economic research," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 57(3), pages 268-284, September.
    16. Dani Rodrik, 1993. "Trade and Industrial Policy Reform in Developing Countries: A Review of Recent Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 4417, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Tang, Chor Foon & Abosedra, Salah, 2014. "The impacts of tourism, energy consumption and political instability on economic growth in the MENA countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 458-464.
    18. Dalibor S. Eterovic, 2011. "Institutional Bias towards the Status Quo," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 167(3), pages 489-514, September.
    19. Paunovic, Igor, 2000. "Growth and reforms in Latin America and the Caribbean in the 1990s," Series Históricas 7604, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    20. Heinemann, Friedrich, 2000. "Die Psychologie irrationaler Wirtschaftspolitik am Beispiel des Reformstaus," ZEW Discussion Papers 00-12, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    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:fth:bosecd: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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iedbuus.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.