Search

Begin New Search Topic Trade Political Geography United States of America Content Type Working Paper

1. The US-EU Trade and Technology Council: Assessing the record on data and technology issues

Author:
Juan Carlos Fernández-Rodríguez and Frances G. Burwell
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
Since its creation, the Trade and Technology Council (TTC) has endorsed a Declaration for the Future of the Internet (DFI), designed a Joint Roadmap for transatlantic cooperation on artificial intelligence (AI) and identified quantum technology as a high priority. While these achievements can be considered success stories, this Discussion Paper argues that the TTC is now facing a dilemma. Different approaches to technology and digital governance and the lack of regulatory autonomy make the TTC best suited to address emerging issues that do not require changes in legislation. Yet, this is precisely what stakeholders want it to address. So, how can the TTC ensure its continuity without regulatory authority? The Paper offers five key recommendations: Make AI a test case and build from the lessons of the Joint AI Roadmap; Engage in issues where there is an initial strong value alignment and no regulation; Work on moonshot ideas such as the “metaverse” or low-earth orbit governance; Take oversight over the special task forces it has created to tackle critical issues such as the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA); Think more actively about how to push its efforts into multilateral forums with like-minded partners.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Trade, and Data
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

2. The Effects of the United States-China Trade War During the COVID-19 Pandemic on Global Supply Chains: Evidence from Viet Nam

Author:
Duc Anh Dang and Ngoc Anh Tran
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
The trade war between the United States (US) and China has affected their bilateral trade as well as that with other countries. This study investigates how Vietnamese firms performed during the COVID-19 pandemic under the shadow of this trade war. The change in the log of Vietnamese exports to the US from 2017 to 2020 is used to measure the impact of the trade war, and the change in the log of Chinese exports to the US is then used as an instrument for the Vietnamese export change during the same period. It is found that firms that faced more trade war exposure increased their investment, profit, and value added, which may be due to the market exit of unproductive firms. Moreover, the trade war impact is more pronounced for large firms. Foreign-invested firms gained less from trade war exposure. The pandemic weakened the trade war effect on firm performances; however, it exacerbated the trade tension effect on foreign-trade firms.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Investment, Trade, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

3. Not So Clear: Revisiting the Impacts of Cap-and-Trade on Environmental Justice

Author:
Michael Ash and Manuel Pastor
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), University of Massachusetts Amherst
Abstract:
A recent article by Danae Hernandez-Cortes and Kyle Meng (HCM) suggests that the cap-and-trade program in California was accompanied by improvements in the degree of environmental inequity in the state. We note that that the model used to estimate this improvement is not well-designed to capture the variation in facility adjustment to the cap-and-trade program that is at the heart of the environmental justice debate about potential shifts in co-pollutant exposure. We also show that even if that were a proper approach, the estimates offered by HCM may be problematic due to data issues, including proper identification of facilities subject to the cap, shifting results when we require that facilities have observations both before and after the cap, and robustness when we apply their method estimates beyond their selected subsample to the broader range of facilities. As such, the environmental justice implications of California’s carbon market remain an unsettled empirical question.
Topic:
Inequality, Trade, Pollution, and Environmental Justice
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. Mexico’s “Catch-22”: The Implications of Being a Trade and Climate Partner of the United States and the European Union

Author:
Simone Lucatello
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Under the current global environmental governance and trade regimes, several initiatives, such as the new United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, the European Union’s European Green Deal, and regional free trade agreements the European Union has implemented with strategic partners like Mexico, are prompting a vibrant discussion on how trade agreements can be used as a potential mechanism to create enforceable cross-border commitments to tackle climate change. However, to cut greenhouse gas emissions within a few decades, a decisive departure from current trends in emission and trade policies is required by all countries, both developed and developing. As a result, politicians, scholars and experts around the world have looked to trade agreements as a possible tool for reaching global climate commitments, either related to or independent from the Paris Agreement. But how well do these agreements suit this purpose? Carbon-intensive products worldwide increased when tariff reductions were implemented, resulting in destructive practices for many countries, particularly those in the Global South. For countries such as Mexico, the nexus between trade and climate change is not easy to address: the country is trapped between its ambitions to play a role in global trade platforms as an industrial manufacturer and agricultural exporter and its desire to be recognized as a global actor in climate change policy and actions within the global community. Despite recent changes in climate and environmental politics under the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (2018–2024), Mexico is a middle-income country with a long-standing tradition as climate champion and environmental leader in the Global South and needs to make clear where it stands under the new global environmental and ecological transition scenario imposed by the climate crisis and trade-related issues. The “entanglement” of global trade treaties and commitments under the current climate crisis, represents a major shift for Mexico. Caught between the new US–Mexico-Canada Agreement, the EU–Mexico Trade Agreement and the possible impacts of the European Green Deal, Mexico needs to define its role in trade and environmental terms alongside giant partners such as the United States and the European Union, while defending its role as a regional power. If the European Green Deal takes off as an international driver for deepening climate and sustainable development goals with European Union strategic partners, it remains to be seen how Mexico will respond to the challenge. In this paper we address the possible implications for Mexico under each of these instruments. We look at the interplay between them, explore the linkages and possible conflictual pathways, and “disentangle” the schemes in which trade and climate change are interconnected. Mexico may be trapped in a “catch-22” situation. Environmental provisions embedded in trade treaties provide critical benefits to the country, but this often comes at the expense of “unacceptable” environmental enforcement measures that can put at risk national development plans, especially at a time when the environment and climate change issues are not at the top of the current administration’s political agenda.
Topic:
Climate Change, Governance, European Union, Partnerships, Trade, and Green Deal
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

5. After the CHIPS Act: The Limits of Reshoring and Next Steps for U.S. Semiconductor Policy

Author:
Vishnu Kannan and Jacob Feldgoise
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The U.S. Congress’s recent success in passing the CHIPS and Science Act (informally the CHIPS Act) shows that legislators are united on one point: the United States needs to manufacture more semiconductors at home. This idea gained traction during the worst days of the coronavirus pandemic, when global shortages of semiconductors halted the manufacturing of automobiles, traditional consumer electronics, and other products that use semiconductors, such as household appliances.1 As demand for these products soared during the pandemic, the world experienced painful price inflation, which amplified the acute geopolitical tensions between the United States and China.2 U.S. policymakers, already worried that dependence on Taiwan for the most sophisticated semiconductors could imperil national security and economic security, saw an urgent need to act.3 And together, rising prices and geopolitical competition underscored the need to invest in domestic economic revitalization. The CHIPS Act’s $52.7 billion investment in domestic semiconductor manufacturing (see table 1) aims to fulfill three main objectives: 1) reduce the likelihood that shocks abroad might disrupt the supply of chips, 2) boost American international economic competitiveness and create domestic jobs, and 3) protect semiconductors from being sabotaged in the manufacturing process. This paper argues that the CHIPS Act, by itself, will not fully accomplish any of these goals. The act is a major step forward, but it leaves multiple gaps that require additional government action.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Legislation, Trade, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Embedding Human Rights in European and US China Policy

Author:
Malin Oud
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
Europe and the United States share an interest in promoting human rights in China but often struggle to affect change in this regard. Because of ineffective approaches and low political commitment, human rights are a marginalized issue in transatlantic China policy and an afterthought to commercial interests. European and US policymakers have attempted to compartmentalize their approach to China, keeping human rights separate from commercial and other interests. This does little to advance human rights, and it only seems to encourage more assertive and coercive behavior by China. During the last few years, the Western assumption that trade and foreign capital would transform China into a more open and democratic society has been replaced by a disillusioned realization that its rise as a superpower is reshaping the international order. Under President Xi Jinping, China has evolved from its previous position as rule-taker and status quo-keeper at the UN to become an assertive rule-maker and international norm entrepreneur. Its vulnerability to external pressure has declined while its power to exert pressure and economic coercion on others has increased. China no longer presents its political and economic model merely as different from but as superior to that of the liberal democracies in the West. For several years now, European and US policymakers have declared an “end of naivety” in relation to China. After years of debating how to make the EU more resilient and robust, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has “given birth to geopolitical Europe,” in the words of its chief diplomat, Josep Borrell. It remains to be seen whether this moment of clarity will translate into a more principled defense of human rights and investment in democratic resilience. For this to happen, there needs to be a broader reckoning with how Western countries for decades mishandled the authoritarian challenge to the international order, often because they were pursuing stronger economic ties with the same governments they now see as systemic rivals.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Human Rights, Business, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

7. Trump ended WTO dispute settlement. Trade remedies are needed to fix it.

Author:
Chad P. Bown
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Unhappy with the rulings of the WTO dispute settlement system, which disproportionately targeted US use of trade remedies, the United States ended the entire system in 2019. There are multiple hurdles to agreeing to new terms of trade remedy use and thus potentially restoring some form of binding dispute settlement. First, a change would affect access to policy flexibility by the now large number of users of trade remedies. Second, although China’s exports are the overwhelming target of trade remedies, exporters in other countries increasingly find themselves caught up in trade remedy actions linked to China. Third, critical differences posed by China’s economic model may call for new rules for trade remedies, but no consensus on those rules has emerged. Even some of the most promising reforms have practical limitations, create additional challenges, or may be politically unviable.
Topic:
Economics, Trade, Donald Trump, and WTO
Political Geography:
China and United States of America

8. Public responses to foreign protectionism: Evidence from the US-China trade war

Author:
David Steinberg and Yeling Tan
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
America's recent turn toward protectionism has raised concerns about the future viability of the liberal international trading system. This study examines how and why public attitudes toward international trade change when one's country is targeted by protectionist measures from abroad. To address this question, the authors fielded three original survey experiments in the country most affected by US protectionism: China. First, they find consistent evidence that US protectionism reduces Chinese citizens' support for trade. This finding is replicated in parallel experiments on technology cooperation, and further validated outside of the China context with a survey experiment in Argentina. Second, they show that responses to US protectionism reflect both a "direct reciprocity" logic—citizens want to retaliate against the United States specifically—and a "generalized reciprocity" logic that reduces support for trade on a broader, systemic basis.
Topic:
Economics, Political Economy, Public Opinion, Trade, and Protectionism
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

9. The US–Italy Economic Relations in a Divided World

Author:
Adriana Castagnoli
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In 2021, bilateral trade returned to the sustained pace it had prior to the Covid pandemic. Direct investment also grew – crucially, not just Italian investment in the United States but the other way round too. While Italy’s economic ties with Russia and China remain potential hotspots, Rome has never questioned its Atlantic orientation. Nevertheless, possible austerity policies following sanctions against Russia could spread social discontent that populist parties can exploit for consensus purposes in the 2023 general election, rekindling anti-Americanism rooted in different segments of Italian society.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Foreign Direct Investment, Economic Policy, Trade, and Energy
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Italy, and United States of America

10. The Digital Silk Road and China’s Influence on Standard Setting

Author:
Alex He
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
China is striving to become a leader in international standard setting, and the Digital Silk Road, part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative to expand its global infrastructure and markets, is key to realizing this goal. Both roads depend on standard connectivity, fuelled by Chinese private companies that are the driving force behind China’s growing role as a leader in technology development and shaping standards in both domestic and global markets. However, China faces strong competition to gain more influence in international standard-setting bodies, which are dominated by the European Union and the United States.
Topic:
Infrastructure, Digital Economy, Trade, Digital Culture, Silk Road, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America