Public opinion, trace policy and surveys

Public opinion on international trade and trade agreements are generally not forthcoming or a priority. Trade negotiators sometimes give it more importance than what the public really perceive it to be.

An interesting piece on this by Scott Lincicome in the context of US trade policy and public opinion makes revealing reading. Titled "The Protectionist Moment that Wasn't" it explains public opinion in the US towards trade.



And the conclusion: a general lack of interest to trade policy issues!

Hat Tip: Cato website.

Disputes settlement information

Dispute settlement is integral to both the multilateral trading system as well as international investment. For those who follow disputes in both these arenas, the WTO website on dispute settlement and the UNCTAD website on ISDS cases is a rich source of information.

While WTO disputes touched 570 in 2018, known ISDS cases touched 904.

Manipulating currencies - Trade agreements to your rescue?

Currency manipulation, trade agreements and solutions are in the news again. I have blogged a lot about this here, here, here, here, here and here. Also managed to write a small piece a few years ago here.

(https://nationalpost.com/news/cash-in-on-currency-wars/wcm/09b25eab-c4f3-48d3-b12d-3273f4a3e5ca)

The latest trade agreement that brings alive the question whether currency manipulation issues are appropriately placed in trade deals is the USMCA. The United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement has a CHAPTER on currency manipulation. This is a step forward from the Joint Declaration in the erstwhile TPP.

This CSIS piece summarizes the new chapter and the impact. This CRS short note also throws light on the issues involved. The chapter is an integral part of the agreement and not a side agreement. It has provisions relating to transparency, prior consultation as well as an undertaking not to manipulate currency for competitive advantage. It also protects legitimate monetary policy space. Well, where one does draw the line there?

Is this a positive move for trade agreement negotiations, as suggested by this Peterson Institute piece? Will this increasingly become the norm in bilateral trade deals? It has been reported that the US is considering these provisions in all its future trade deals.

I thought it was 2013 that was the year of currency manipulation in trade agreements. Five years later, the knock seems louder. 

Trade Agreements 2.0?

NAFTA rewired - USMCA

A very enlightening talk on the new US-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement in a series called Trade Talks by Soumaya Keynes and Chad Bown.

An interesting point was that the thing that has changed vis a vis NAFTA is a whole set of new rules in the new agreement. So market access was not the defining narrative of the new agreement since most of trade was already liberalised amongst the three partners under NAFTA. 

The new dimension was new rules of the game that covered inter alia the following:

1. Dispute settlement - Very interesting changes n the ISDS mechanism - limited scope vis a vis U-Mexico disputes and phase out for US-Canada disputes.
2. Labour standards - requires Members to maintain certain standards and some specific obligations on Mexico. Current NAFTA apparently has a side agreement on labour standards.
3. Rules of Origin for Motor vehicles - 62.5% car's value increased to 75% needs to be North American content and worker's wages condition.
4. Currency manipulation - not the gold standard, but some obligations that sets a precedent.

Well, this goes to show the legal complexity of obligations and the scope that trade agreements can cover.

@Hat tip - Peterson Institute Blog

Diversity of thought - Always welcome

This piece in Bloomberg is not about international economic law directly but the logic applies to it too. 

It talks about the need for diversity in thought in Universities, in the context of the US.

Nonetheless, the current numbers make two points unmistakably clear. 

First, those who teach in departments lacking ideological diversity have an obligation to offer competing views and to present them fairly and with respect. A political philosopher who leans left should be willing and able to ask students to think about the force of the argument for free markets, even if they produce a lot of inequality. 

Second, those who run departments lacking ideological diversity have an obligation to find people who will represent competing views — visiting speakers, visiting professors and new hires. Faculties need not be expected to mirror their societies, but students and teachers ought not live in information cocoons. 

John Stuart Mill put it well: “It is hardly possible to overrate the value ... of placing human beings in contact with persons dissimilar to themselves, and with modes of thought and action unlike those with which they are familiar. Such communication has always been, and is peculiarly in the present age, one of the primary sources of progress.” 

I was trying to draw a parallel with diversity of thought on international trade law and policy, on approaches of free markets and protectionism and of staggered liberalisation and full-fledged opening up. A diversity of opinions and debate is always good!

Stakeholder consultations and FTA negotiations.

Stakeholder consultations in trade negotiations is a challenging task. Which interests constitute 'national interest', which diverse interests are to represented in the negotiations and how do we take stakeholder comments on board.

I found this webpage on consultations by the Canadian government on their FTA with ASEAN very interesting. It is titled 'Consulting Canadians on a possible Canada-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement', provides basic information on the need for the FTA and what they are looking for.

We want to hear from you. We need to hear your ideas, your experiences, and your priorities in relation to a possible FTA with ASEAN through these consultations.
These consultations will seek the views of Canadians to help define Canada’s interests in a possible free trade agreement, and identify opportunities for such an agreement to create wealth, innovation and jobs for Canadians.

The list of people invited to offer comments is also widespread from labour unions to indigenous people to students.

A good model to follow in complex, trade negotiations? 

Beginning or the End?

A detailed policy brief on what WTO Members must and must not do in the field of negotiations is found in the CATO website titled 'Was Buenos Aires the Beginning of the End of the End of the Beginning? The Future of the World Trade Organization'. 

James Bacchus talks about the relevance of the negotiating function and what should be done.

Members must begin to negotiate in new ways that will lead to new trade agreements— and soon. If WTO members wait, if they hesitate, if they simply talk without really negotiating, and if they fail to act immediately on their shared realization that new challenges necessitate a new way of doing things, then the next ministerial conference of the WTO in 2019 may be the last one that many involved in trade policymaking will bother to attend.

 Whether the negotiating function will regain its momentum, what issues will gain significance and which ones will lead to fruition will depend on a variety of factors including national alignments, alliances and priorities.