IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/10826.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reciprocated Unilateralism in Trade Reforms with Majority Voting

Author

Listed:
  • Pravin Krishna
  • Devashish Mitra

Abstract

This paper shows how unilateral liberalization in one country can increase the voting support for reciprocal reduction in trade barriers in a partner country. When trade policies are determined simultaneously in the two countries, we show the possibility of multiple political equilibria - countries may both be protectionist or trade freely with each other. Starting with trade protection in both countries, a unilateral reform in one country is thus shown to bring about a free trade equilibrium (a self-enforcing state) that is consistent with majority voting in both countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Pravin Krishna & Devashish Mitra, 2004. "Reciprocated Unilateralism in Trade Reforms with Majority Voting," NBER Working Papers 10826, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:10826
    Note: ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w10826.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gordon H. Hanson & Antonio Spilimbergo, 2001. "Political economy, sectoral shocks, and border enforcement," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 612-638, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Alberto Alesina & Dani Rodrik, 1994. "Distributive Politics and Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 465-490.
    4. Mayer, Wolfgang, 1981. "Theoretical Considerations on Negotiated Tariff Adjustments," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 135-153, March.
    5. Krishna, Pravin & Mitra, Devashish, 2005. "Reciprocated unilateralism in trade policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 461-487, March.
    6. Limao Nuno & Panagariya Arvind, 2004. "Anti-trade Bias in Trade Policy and General Equilibrium," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Mayer, Wolfgang, 1984. "Endogenous Tariff Formation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 970-985, December.
    8. Rodrik, Rani, 1995. "Trade and industrial policy reform," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 45, pages 2925-2982 Elsevier.
    9. Coates, Daniel E. & Ludema, Rodney D., 2001. "A theory of trade policy leadership," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-29, June.
    10. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    11. Dutt, Pushan & Mitra, Devashish, 2002. "Endogenous trade policy through majority voting: an empirical investigation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 107-133, October.
    12. Alvaro Forteza & Daniel Buquet & Mario Ibarburu & Jorge Lanzaro & Andrés Pereyra & Eduardo Siandra & Marcel Vaillant, 2003. "Understanding reform. The Uruguayan case," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0603, Department of Economics - dECON.
    13. Fernandez, Raquel & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Resistance to Reform: Status Quo Bias in the Presence of Individual-Specific Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1146-1155, December.
    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. Baldwin, Richard, 2011. "21st century regionalism: Filling the gap between 21st century trade and 20th century trade rules," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2011-08, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    2. Baldwin, Richard, 2010. "Unilateral tariff liberalisation," CEPR Discussion Papers 8162, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Pierre-Louis Vézina, 2014. "Race-to-the-bottom Tariff Cutting," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 444-458, August.
    4. Paul Missios & Halis Murat Yildiz, 2017. "Do SouthSouth preferential trade agreements undermine the prospects for multilateral free trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(1), pages 111-161, February.
    5. Emily Blanchard & Gerald Willmann, 2007. "Political Stasis or Protectionist Rut? Policy Mechanisms for Trade Reform in a Democracy," CESifo Working Paper Series 2070, CESifo Group Munich.
    6. Claire H. Hollweg & Daniel Lederman & Devashish Mitra, 2016. "Structural Reforms and Labour-market Outcomes: International Panel-data Evidence," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(7), pages 925-963, July.
    7. Blanchard, Emily & Willmann, Gerald, 2011. "Escaping a protectionist rut: Policy mechanisms for trade reform in a democracy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 72-85, September.
    8. Richard Baldwin, 2014. "WTO 2.0: governance of global supply-chain trade," Chapters,in: A World Trade Organization for the 21st Century, chapter 2, pages 12-47 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Yasar, Mahmut, 2013. "Political Influence of Exporting and Import-Competing Firms: Evidence from Eastern European and Central Asian Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 154-168.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade

    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:nbr:nberwo:10826. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: () or (Joanne Lustig). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.