IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/vhsuwp/2012_116.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

(When) Does Tit-for-Tat Diplomay in Trade Policy Pay Off?

Author

Listed:
  • Dluhosch, Barbara

    () (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

  • Horgos, Daniel

    () (Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

Abstract

In international relations, short-run incentives for non-cooperation often dominate. Yet, (external) institutions for enforcing cooperation are hampered by national sovereignty, supposedly strengthening the role of selfenforcing mechanisms. This paper examines their scope with a focus on contingent protection aka tit-for-tat in trade policy. By highlighting various strategies in a (linear) partial-equilibrium framework, we show that retaliation of noncooperative behavior by limiting market access works as a disciplining device independently of supply and demand parameters. Our theoretical results are backed by empirical evidence that countries more frequently involved in WTO-mediated disputes entailing tit-for-tat strategies pursue on average more liberal trade regimes.

Suggested Citation

  • Dluhosch, Barbara & Horgos, Daniel, 2012. "(When) Does Tit-for-Tat Diplomay in Trade Policy Pay Off?," Working Paper 116/2012, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:vhsuwp:2012_116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hsu-hh.de/fgvwl/index_jxtg3c5J2svNui1O.html
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petros C. Mavroidis & Patrick A. Messerlin & Jasper M. Wauters, 2008. "The Law and Economics of Contingent Protection in the WTO," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12731, April.
    2. James A. Brander & Barbara J. Spencer, 1981. "Tariffs and the Extraction of Foreign Monopoly Rents under Potential Entry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 14(3), pages 371-389, August.
    3. Ethier, Wilfred J., 2007. "The theory of trade policy and trade agreements: A critique," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 605-623, September.
    4. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1982. "Tariff Protection and Imperfect Competition," Working Papers 517, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
    5. Hungerford, Thomas L., 1991. "GATT: A cooperative equilibrium in a noncooperative trading regime?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3-4), pages 357-369, November.
    6. Pelc, Krzysztof J., 2010. "Constraining Coercion? Legitimacy and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy, 1975–2000," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(01), pages 65-96, January.
    7. Subramanian, Arvind & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2007. "The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 151-175, May.
    8. 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.
    9. Rhodes, Carolyn, 1989. "Reciprocity in trade: the utility of a bargaining strategy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(02), pages 273-299, March.
    10. Ludema, Rodney D & Mayda, Anna Maria, 2010. "Do terms-of-trade effects matter for trade agreements? Evidence from WTO countries," CEPR Discussion Papers 7695, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Limão, Nuno & Saggi, Kamal, 2008. "Tariff retaliation versus financial compensation in the enforcement of international trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 48-60, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Bhagwati, Jagdish, 1990. "Departures from Multilateralism: Regionalism and Aggressive Unilateralism," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1304-1317, December.
    14. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2008. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-77, September.
    15. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2010. "The World Trade Organization: Theory and Practice," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 223-256, September.
    16. Bown, Chad P. & Ruta, Michele, 2008. "The economics of permissible WTO retaliation," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2008-04, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    17. Keohane, Robert O., 1986. "Reciprocity in international relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(01), pages 1-27, December.
    18. Schwartz, Warren F & Sykes, Alan O, 2002. "The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 179-204, January.
    19. Bowen, T. Renee, 2010. "Limits of the WTO as a Self-Enforcing Institution," Research Papers 2071, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Int. Political Economy; Trade Policy Conflicts; Tit-for-Tat; WTO Dispute Settlement;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions

    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:ris:vhsuwp:2012_116. 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: (Klaus Bekcmann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/egbwhde.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.