Talk of a potential bilateral trade deal between the US and EU is heating up, probably because Obama gave it attention in his State of the Union Address. Matt Yglesias thinks the deal is going to be difficult, because it will focus on "thornier" issues like agriculture and regulatory policies. Tyler Cowen thinks that regulatory barriers makes a deal unlikely as well. The Financial Times also sounds a somewhat skeptical note. There's plenty more where that comes from if you look around the commentariat.
Well, in a stunning reversal of our typical demeanor, Sarah and I are here to make the optimistic case for a deal getting done. The full essay is in The National Interest, but the basic argument is that normal political problems standing in the way of a deal are reversed in this case: there are no easily-identifiable domestic interest groups likely to mobilize politically to lobby against it, it might provide the US and EU with much-needed leverage in WTO negotiations, and it could impact the future of international investment law.
Check it out.
IPE @ UNC
IPE@UNC is a group blog maintained by faculty and graduate students in the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The opinions expressed on these pages are our own, and have nothing to do with UNC.
Bookshelf
Tags
Academia Adjustment Afghanistan Africa AIG America Argentina Austerity Bailout Banking Bargaining Basel Bernanke Bias Blogging Business cycle; recession; financial crisis Cap and Trade capital controls capital flows central banks; moral hazard Chavez China China Trade Climate Change Contentious Politics Cuba Currencies Currency Crises; financial crisis Current Account Data Debt Debt; China; United States; Decession Politics Decoupling Deflation democracy Democrats; Trade policy development Diplomacy Dollar; China; Currency Manipulation; Exchange Rates dollar; exchange rate policy ECB ECB; Fed; Monetary Policy Economic Growth Economics Egypt election EMU; monetary union Environment EU; Agriculture; Common Agricultural Policy Euro Europe; labor; immigration European Union Exchange Rates Farm Bill; Agriculture FDI Fed; Monetary Policy finance financial crisis financial crisis; subprime Fiscal Policy; monetary policy; elections Fiscal Stimulus Foreign Aid Foreign Policy France Free Trade Agreements G-20 G20 Summit Game Theory Germany global recession globalization Grand Theory Great Britain Greece health care reform Hegemony Human Rights Iceland imbalance IMF immigration Incentives income distribution income inequality; globalization India Inequality inflation institutions Interests international finance International Law International Monetary System International Relations Investment IPE Iran Iraq Ireland ISA Italy Japan labor markets Latin America Libya Macroeconomics Marxism Mexico Microfinance Miscellany monetary policy Monetary policy; Federal Reserve moral hazard Narcissism Networks Nobelist Smackdown North Korea Obama Oil PIGS Pirates Political Economy Political Methodology Political Science Political Survival Political Theory Power Protectionism Protests Public Choice Public opinion Rational Choice regulation Research Review Russia Sanctions Security Dilemma security threats Soccer Social Science Sovereign Debt Spain Sports Statistics stock markets Systems Tariffs TARP Taxes TBTF Technocracy technology terrorism Trade trade policy UNC Unemployment United States US-South Korea Venezuela WTO WTO; Doha
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(95)
-
▼
February
(23)
- UNC Everywhere
- Cultural Amnesia: We Must Invest in STEM or We Wil...
- How the World Works, Redux
- It Isn't Always Appropriate in Comparative Politic...
- A BIT (sorry) More on ISDs
- Against Ceteris Paribus Theories of International ...
- Outside Options
- When Is Reductionism Not Appropriate in Theory?
- How Not to Write an Abstract
- The Downside of a Currency War
- NSF Recipient Has "No Idea" if He Should Be an NSF...
- Another Shameless Plug
- A wonkish complaint about gravity models
- A Shameless Plug
- There. Is. No. Technocracy. Dammit.
- Global Trade Network, 2006
- More on Trade Politics
- Global Trade Network
- Ditch the Job Talk...
- Does Social Science Deserve Public Funding?
- Tim Harford on Thomas Schelling
- Quantum Gravity Trade Models
- The Reductionist Gamble
-
▼
February
(23)
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Another Shameless Plug
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Canada and the EU are putting the finishing touches on a FTA and the remaining issues appear to be tied to government procurement in Canada, Canadian IP rules and agriculture. While I think you're spot on about the politics when it comes to traditional trade barriers, I am skeptical about how much support there is in the US or for that matter Canada for regulatory harmonization. The interesting question is whether or not this kind of trade deal is a mechanism for reforming domestic regulation in a more market friendly manner. If Canada sacrifices its dairy marketing boards then maybe yes it is;if Canada strengthens patent protection on pharmaceuticals it'll be a step away from liberalization.
Vladimir,
Thanks for the comment. We knew about the Canada-EU FTA, but couldn't cover it properly in the space we had. It's possible that that, in combination with US-Canada integration via NAFTA, provided some of the emphasis for the EU-US negotiations to begin.
I think some regulations will be more difficult to harmonize than others. Many producers would love to have harmonization in manufacturing. Agriculture may be more difficult, esp when it comes to things like GMOs.
I also think you're right that harmonization does not always mean liberalization. Pharma IP is one example of this.
Anyway, the outcome remains to be seen. What Sarah and I were arguing is that the normal political constraints appear to be somewhat different in this case. Whether other constraints emerge is something of a different question, but for now all of the major stakeholders appear to support some kind of deal. That may change when the details are negotiated, of course.
Post a Comment