IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/402.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The GATT as international discipline over trade restrictions : a public choice approach

Author

Listed:
  • Finger, J. Michael

Abstract

The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was built on a mercantilist sense of economic welfare and a mercantilist sense that domestic producers had a higher claim than foreign producers to the domestic market. The trade negotiations process did not attack this claim. It gave producers in each country an opportunity to increase its value through mutually beneficial exchanges with producers in other countries. The process worked as long as institutions forced all producers in a country to reach a collective decision on trade policy. Another mutation of GATT institutions has begun with the development in the United States of"301", which provides a way for exporting producers to advance their interests without bearing the burden of suppressing or buying off import competing interests. Indeed,"301"attacks foreign restrictions not with the possibility of fewer U.S. restrictions, but with the threat of more. Trade remedy processes have been installed in many countries, so"301s"should not be far behind. The GATT system was devised to promote global security and free trade. In the present system, export interests will generate trade conflicts and import competing interestswill generate trade restrictions. Simply put, the institutions that shape the relevant public choices do not bring out the appropriate economic interests, and the resulting policy choices are not those that promote economic efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Finger, J. Michael, 1990. "The GATT as international discipline over trade restrictions : a public choice approach," Policy Research Working Paper Series 402, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1990/03/01/000009265_3960929010139/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Takacs, Wendy E, 1985. "More on Protectionist Pressure and Aggregate Economic Conditions: A Reply [Pressures for Protectionism: An Empirical Analysis]," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(1), pages 183-184, January.
    2. Coughlin, Cletus C & Terza, Joseph V & Khalifah, Noor Aini, 1989. "The Determinants of Escape Clause Petitions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(2), pages 341-347, May.
    3. Salvatore, Dominick, 1987. "Import penetration, exchange rates, and protectionism in the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 125-141.
    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. Gould, David M. & Woodbridge, Graeme L., 1998. "The political economy of retaliation, liberalization and trade wars," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 115-137, February.
    2. Finger, Michael J. & Dhar, Sumana, 1992. "Do rules control power? GATT articles and arrangements in the Uruguay Round," Policy Research Working Paper Series 818, The World Bank.
    3. Wilfred J. Ethier, 2002. "Trade Policies Based on Political Externalities: An Exploration, Third Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 04-006, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 04 Feb 2004.
    4. 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.
    5. Kozloff, Keith & Runge, C. Ford, 1991. "International Trade In The Food Sector And Environmental Quality, Health, And Safety: A Survey Of Policy Issues," Staff Papers 13325, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.

    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. Jae W. Chung, 1998. "Effects of U.S. Trade Remedy Law Enforcement under Uncertainty: The Case of Steel," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 151-159, July.
    2. Aradhna Aggarwal, 2003. "Patterns and determinants of anti-dumping: A worldwide perspective," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 113, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    3. Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of US Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 55-80, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Marcel Vaillant & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2011. "Micro and Macro Determinants of trade temporary barriers: the Brazilian case over the last two decades," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0711, Department of Economics - dECON.
    5. Georgios Georgiadis & Johannes Gräb, 2016. "Growth, Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism since the Financial Crisis," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1050-1080, November.
    6. Chung, Jae W., 1999. "Insights Into Trade Protection under U.S. Trade Remedy Laws," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 375-387, May.
    7. Aggarwal, Aradhna, 2004. "Macro Economic Determinants of Antidumping: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1043-1057, June.
    8. Bettina Becker & Martin Theuringer, 2000. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Contingent Protection: The Case of the European Union," IWP Discussion Paper Series 02/2000, Institute for Economic Policy, Cologne, Germany.
    9. Oatley Thomas, 2010. "Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, August.
    10. Azrak, Paul & Wynne, Kevin, 1995. "Protectionism and Japanese direct investment in the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 293-305, June.
    11. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    12. Tansey, Michael & Raju, Sudhakar & Stellern, Michael, 2005. "Price controls, trade protectionism and political business cycles in the U.S. steel industry," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 1097-1109, December.
    13. Robert Baldwin & Jeffrey Steagall, 1994. "An analysis of ITC decisions in antidumping, countervailing duty and safeguard cases," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 130(2), pages 290-308, June.
    14. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    15. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    16. Dominick Salvatore, 1991. "Trade Protection and Foreign Direct Investment in the U.S," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 516(1), pages 91-105, July.
    17. K. Jones, 2000. "Does NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) Chapter 19 make a difference? Dispute settlement and the incentive structure of U.S./Canada unfair trade petitions," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(2), pages 145-158, April.
    18. Michael J. Hiscox, 2004. "International Capital Mobility And Trade Politics: Capital Flows, Political Coalitions, And Lobbying," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 253-285, November.
    19. Maya Cohen-Meidan, "undated". "Vertical Integration and Trade Protection: The Case of Antidumping Duties," Discussion Papers 08-034, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    20. Harrison, Ann, 1991. "The new trade protection : price effects of antidumping and countervailing measures in the United States," Policy Research Working Paper Series 808, The World Bank.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:402. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.