Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:56:01.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part II - Trade Policy and Trade-Related Concerns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2019

Edited by
Manfred Elsig ,
Michael Hahn  and
Gabriele Spilker
Manfred Elsig
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Michael Hahn
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Gabriele Spilker
Affiliation:
Universität Salzburg
Get access

Summary

This chapter first characterizes the fundamental purposes of the WTO and trade agreements, which should be viewed as much broader than trade liberalization. It then presents the major challenges that the trade system now faces. Special emphasis is paid to technological change since the WTO was created in 1995, namely, the development of global value chains. Finally, the author contends that trade agreements, in response, must be designed and conditioned upon social policy commitments. They should include, or be conditioned upon, agreements that cover: coordinated tax policy to combat harmful tax competition, tax avoidance, and tax evasion; domestic social security and job retraining, supported by trade adjustment commitments; labor protection; protections against social dumping; and accommodation of industrial policy experimentation for development. It will not be an easy process to reconceive trade agreements to better ensure social inclusion through these means, but the current system otherwise could unravel.

Keywords

trade agreementssocial policytaxtrade adjustmentlaborclimatecarbon adjustmentWorld Trade OrganizationParis AgreementWTOPTAsmultilateralizationenvironmental provisionsPTAsnon-trade issues
Type
Chapter
Information
The Shifting Landscape of Global Trade Governance
World Trade Forum
 , pp. 155 - 252
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Alstadsæter, A., Johannesen, N., and Zucman, G.. 2017. “Tax Evasion and Inequality, No. w23772,” National Bureau of Economic Research, www.nber.org/papers/w23772, accessed April 1, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autor, D., Dorn, D., and Hanson, G.. 2013. “The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States,” American Economic Review 103(6):2121–68.Google Scholar
Avi-Yonah, R. S. 2016 “Constructive Unilateralism: U.S. Leadership and International Taxation,” International Tax Journal 42(2):17–24.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. 2016. The Great Convergence: Information Technology and the New Globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brauner, Y. 2016. “Treaties in the Aftermath of BEPS,” Brooklyn Journal of International Law 41(3):973–1041.Google Scholar
CAFTA. 2017 . “In the Matter of Guatemala – Issues Relating to Obligations under Article 16.2.1(a) of CAFTA-DR (Final Panel Report),” www.trade.gov/industry/tas/Guatemala%20%20%E2%80%93%20Obligations%20Under%20Article%2016-2-1(a)%20of%20the%20CAFTA-DR%20%20June%2014%202017.pdf, accessed on April 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Chang, H. J. 2002. Kicking Away the Ladder. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Cimino-Isaacs, C. 2016. “Labor Standards in the TPP.” Assessing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Peterson Institute for International Economics 41–65.Google Scholar
Cobham, A. and Jansky, P.. 2017. “Global Distribution of Revenue Loss from Tax Avoidance: Re-estimation and Country Results,” WIDER Working Paper 2017/55, www.wider.unu.edu/publication/global-distribution-revenue-loss-tax-avoidance, accessed April 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Council Secretariat of the European Union. 2008. “Implementation of the Common Principles of Flexicurity within the Framework of the 2008–2010 Round of the Lisbon Strategy,” http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=102/, accessed April 1, 2018.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2017. “European Commission Fact Sheet: The EU Is Changing Its Anti-dumping Anti-Subsidy Legislation to Address State Induced Market Distortions,” October 4, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-3703_en.htm, accessed January 12, 2018.Google Scholar
European Trade Union Confederation. 2017. “ETUC Resolution for an EU Progressive Trade and Investment Policy,” June 16, www.etuc.org/documents/etuc-resolution-eu-progressive-trade-and-investment-policy-adopted-executive-committee#, accessed April 1, 2018.Google Scholar
European Union Council Directive 2016/1164. 2016. “Laying Down Rules against Tax Avoidance Practices That Directly Affect the Functioning of the Internal Market,” Official Journal of the European Union, L 193.Google Scholar
Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), 26 U.S.C. §§ 1471-1474.Google Scholar
Garcia, F. and Meyer, T.. 2017. “Restoring Trade’s Social Contract,” Michigan Law Review Online 116(78):78–100.Google Scholar
Grossman, G. and Rossi-Hansberg, E.. 2008. “Trading Tasks: A Simple Theory of Offshoring,” American Economic Review 98(5):1978–97.Google Scholar
Haussman, R. et al. 2008. “Reconfiguring Industrial Policy: A Framework with an Application to South Africa,” HKS Working Paper No. RWP08-031.Google Scholar
Irwin, D. 2011. Peddling Protectionism: Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, T. 2017. “Saving the Political Consensus in Favor of Free Trade,” Vanderbilt Law Review 70(3):985–1026.Google Scholar
Milanović, B. 2016. Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
OECD. 2017. Background Brief – Inclusive Framework on BEPS, Paris, France: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
OECD. 2013. Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. H. B. et al. 2016. International Trade Law. New York: Wolters Kluwer.Google Scholar
Picciotto, S. 2017. “The Deconstruction of Offshore,” In: Klug, H. and Engle Merry, S. (Eds.), The New Legal Realism: Studying Law Globally. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Piketty, T. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rodrik, D. 2011. The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Rodrik, D. 2017. Straight Talk on Trade: Ideas for a Sane World Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Saez, E. and Zucman, G.. 2014. “Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 20625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaffer, G., Elsig, M., and Puig, S.. 2017. “The Law and Politics of WTO Dispute Settlement,” In: Sandholtz, W. and Whytock, C. (Eds.), The Research Handbook on The Politics of International Law. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 269–306.Google Scholar
Shaffer, G. et al. 2015. “Can Informal Law Discipline Subsidies,” International Economics and Law Journal 18(2):711–41.Google Scholar
Sykes, A. O. and Cooper, R. N.. 1998. “Anti-dumping and Antitrust: What Problems Does Each Address,” In: Collins, S. M. and Lawrence, R. Z (Eds.), Brookings Trade Forum. Washington, DC: Brooking Institution Press.Google Scholar
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2016. “GSP Handbook on the Scheme of the European Union UNCTAD/ITCD/TSB/MISC.25/Rev.4,” http://unctad.org/en/pages/PublicationWebflyer.aspx?publicationid=1470, accessed April 1, 2018.Google Scholar
Wilthagen, T. and Tros, F. H.. 2004 “The Concept of Flexicurity: A New Approach to Regulation Employment and Labour Market,” European Review of Labour and Research 10(2):166–86.Google Scholar
WTO Agreement on Safeguards, Article 8, April 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1869 U.N.T.S. 154.Google Scholar
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Article 8.2, April 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1869 U.N.T.S. 14.Google Scholar
WTO Appellate Body Report. 2014. “European Communities – Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products,” WTO Doc. WT/DS400/AB/R, WT/DS401/AB/R, adopted June 18, 2014.Google Scholar
WTO Council for Trade in Goods. 2017. “Procedures to Enhance Transparency and Strengthen Notification Requirements Under WTO Agreements,” World Trade Organization JOB/GC/148, October 30, 2017.Google Scholar
WTO International Labor Office. 2017. “Investing in Skills for Inclusive Trade,” www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/investinsskills_e.pdf, accessed October 13, 2017.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2016. “WTO Public Forum 2016,” www.wto.org/english/forums_e/publicforum16_e/public_forum16_e.html, accessed October 13, 2017.Google Scholar
Zucman, G. 2013 “The Missing Wealth of Nations: Are Europe and the US Net Debtors or Net Creditors?” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 128(3):1321–64.Google Scholar

References

Bacchus, J. 2017. The Case for a WTO Climate Waiver. Waterloo, Canada: Centre for International Governance Innovation.Google Scholar
Boden, T. A., Marland, G. and Andres, R. J.. 2016. “Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions,” Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN. doi:10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2016.cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/meth_reg.html.Google Scholar
Böhringer, C. and Rutherford, T. F.. August 2017. “US Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Economic Implications of Carbon-Tariff Conflicts,” Discussion Paper 17-89. Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, Kennedy School of Government. www.belfercenter.org/publication/harvard-project-climate-agreements-discussion-paper-series/roundup.Google Scholar
BP. 2016. “Statistical Review of World Energy,” www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics.html.Google Scholar
Chang, B. 2017. “A Proposal for a Multilateral Border Carbon Adjustment That Is Consistent with International Trade Law,” Opinion Series. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. www.ictsd.org/opinion/a-proposal-for-a-multilateral-border-carbon-adjustment-scheme-that-is-consistent.Google Scholar
Climate Central. 2015. “Mapping Choices: Carbon, Climate, and Rising Seas, Our Global Legacy,” sealevel.climatecentral.org/research/reports/mapping-choices-carbon-climate-and-rising-seas-our-global-legacy.Google Scholar
Climate Interactive. 2017a. “Climate Scoreboard.” www.climateinteractive.org/programs/scoreboard/, accessed August 1, 2017.Google Scholar
Climate Interactive. 2017b. “US Subnational Climate Action.” www.climateinteractive.org/programs/us-subnational-climate-action/, accessed August 1, 2017.Google Scholar
Cosbey, A., Droege, S., Fischer, C., Reinaud, J., Stephenson, J., Weischer, L. and Wooders, P.. 2012. “A Guide for the Concerned: Guidance on the Elaboration and Implementation of Border Carbon Adjustment,” Policy Report 2012/11/20. Stockholm: ENTWINED. www.entwined.se.Google Scholar
Crunden, E. A. 2017. “Texas Isn’t Alone: South Asia Is Also Suffering the Horrors of Climate Change,” Think Progress. https://thinkprogress.org/texas-south-asia-climate-change-fe2c744f725a/, accessed June 30, 2018.Google Scholar
Feldstein, M. and Krugman, P.. 1990. “International Trade Effects of Value-added Taxation,” In: Razin, A. and Slemrod, J. (Eds.), Taxation in the Global Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fernández-Amador, O., Francois, J. and Tomberger, P.. 2016. “Carbon Dioxide Emissions and International Trade at the Turn of the Millennium,” Ecological Economics 125:14–26.Google Scholar
Gillis, J. 2017. “Carbon in Atmosphere Is Rising, Even as Emissions Stabilize,” New York Times, 26 June.Google Scholar
Grossman, G., Henrik, H. and Mavroidis, P.. 2013. “National Treatment,” In: Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. (Eds.), Legal and Economic Principles of World Trade Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hance, J. 2013. “Head of IMF: Climate Change Is ‘the Greatest Economic Challenge of the 21st Century.’” Mongabay, February 6, 2013. https://news.mongabay.com/2013/02/head-of-imf-climate-change-is-the-greatest-economic-challenge-of-the-21st-century/.Google Scholar
Hillman, J. 2013. Changing Climate for Carbon Taxes: Who’s Afraid of the WTO? Climate and Energy Paper Series. Washington, DC: German Marshall Fund of the United States.Google Scholar
Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. C.. 2011. “To B(TA) or Not to B(TA)? On the Legality and Desirability of Border Tax Adjustments from a Trade Perspective,” The World Economy 34 (11): 1911–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, C. and Weber, R. H.. 2011. “Carbon-related Border Tax Adjustment: Mitigating Climate Change or Restricting International Trade?” World Trade Review 10(4):497–525.Google Scholar
Kemp, L. 2016. “US-proofing the Paris Climate Agreement,” Climate Policy 17(1):86–101.Google Scholar
McAusland, C. and Najjar, N.. 2015. “Carbon Footprint Taxes,” Environmental Resource Economics 61: 37–70.Google Scholar
OECD. 2013. “Taxing Energy Use: A Graphical Analysis.” http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264183933-en.Google Scholar
OECD. 2015. “Taxing Energy Use 2015: OECD and Selected Partner Economies,” Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264232334-en.Google Scholar
OECD. 2018. “OECD Companion to the Inventory of Support Measures for Fossil Fuels 2018,” Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264286061-en.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2012. “Carbon Leakage Measures and Border Tax Adjustments under WTO Law,” In: Prévost, D. and Van Calster, G. (Eds.), Research Handbook on Environment, Health, and the WTO. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 448–506.Google Scholar
Peters, G. P., Le Quéré, C., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Friedlingstein, P., Ilyina, T., Jackson, R. B., Joos, F., Korsbakken, J. I., McKinley, G. A., Sitch, S. and Tans, P.. 2017. “Towards Real-time Verification of CO2 Emissions,” Nature Climate Change 7:848–50. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-017-0013-9.Google Scholar
Plumer, B. 2017. “At Bonn Climate Talks, Stakes Get Higher in Gamble on Planet’s Future,” New York Times, November 18.Google Scholar
Ripple, W. J., Wolf, C., Newsome, T. M., Galetti, G., Alamgir, M., Crist, E., Mahmoud, M. I., Laurance, W. F. and 15,364 signatories from 184 countries. 2017. “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice,” BioScience, bix125, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix125.Google Scholar
Sanctuary, M. 2018. “Border Carbon Adjustments and Unilateral Incentives to Regulate the Climate,” Review of International Economics 26(4):826–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/roie.12344.Google Scholar
Shaffer, G. and Bodansky, D.. 2012. “Transnationalism, Unilateralism, and International Law,” Transnational Environmental Law 1(1):31–41. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102511000033.Google Scholar
Trump, D. J. 2017. “Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord,” White House. Speech. www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/, accessed January 16, 2018.Google Scholar
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 2016. “National Inventory Submissions 2016. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,” unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/9492.php, accessed June 1, 2016.Google Scholar
USNOAA. 2017. “Monthly Mean CO2 Concentrations at Mauna Loa,” ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt.Google Scholar
Urban, M. C. 2015. “Accelerating Extinction Risk from Climate Change,” Science 348 (6234): 571–73. doi:10.1126/science.aaa4984.Google Scholar
Vranes, E. 2016. “Carbon Taxes, PPMs and the GATT,” In: Delimatsis, P. (Ed.), Research Handbook on Climate Change and Trade Law. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
World Energy Council. 2015. “The Road to Resilience: Managing and Financing Extreme Weather Risks,” Financing Resilient Energy Infrastructure Series. www.worldenergy.org/publications/2015/the-road-to-resilience-managing-and-financing-extreme-weather-risk/.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2001. “United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products. Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia”, AB-2001-4. WT/DS58/AB/RW.Google Scholar
Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. 2017. “Trump Voters and Global Warming,” http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/trump-voters-global-warming/.Google Scholar

References

Allee, T. and Elsig, M. forthcoming. “Are the Contents of International Treaties Copied-and-Pasted? Evidence from Preferential Trade Agreements,” International Studies Quarterly.Google Scholar
Anuradha, R. V. 2011. “Environment,” In: Chauffour, J.P. and Maur, J.C.. (Eds.), Preferential Trade Agreement Policies for Development: A Handbook. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications, pp. 407–25.Google Scholar
Baghdadi, L., Martinez-Zarzoso, L., and Zitouna, H.. 2013. “Are RTA Agreements with Environmental Provisions Reducing Emissions?” Journal of International Economics 90(2): 378–90.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. 2014. Multilateralising 21st Century Regionalism. Paris: OECD Conference Center.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R., Evenett, S. J., and Low, P.. 2009. “Beyond Tariffs: Multilateralising Non-Tariff RTA Commitments,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds), Multilateralising Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 79–141.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. and Low, P.. 2009. Multilateralising Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bastiaens, I. and Postnikov, E.. 2017. “Greening Up: The Effects of Environmental Standards in EU and US Trade Agreements,” Environmental Politics 26(5):1–23.Google Scholar
Berger, A., Brandi, C., Bruhn, D., and Chi, M.. 2017. Towards ‘Greening’ Trade? Tracking Environmental Provisions in the Preferential Trade Agreements of Emerging Markets. Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).Google Scholar
Berger, A. and Liu, W. H.. 2017. “Can the G20 Serve as a Launchpad for a Multilateral Investment Agreement?” Paper presented at the conference Is a Multilateral Investment Treaty Needed? World Trade Institute (WTI), Bern.Google Scholar
Chaytor, B. 2009. Environmental Issues in Economic Partnership Agreements. Geneva: ICTSD.Google Scholar
Draper, P., Khumalo, X., and Tigere, F.. 2017. Ensuring Sustainability through Trade Agreements. Sustainability Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Can They Be Multilateralised? Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. Draft: Work in Progress.Google Scholar
Dür, A., Baccini, L., and Elsig, M.. 2014. “The Design of International Trade Agreements: Introducing a New Dataset,” The Review of International Organizations 9(3):353–75.Google Scholar
Gehring, M. W., Segger, M. C. C., De Andrade Correa, F., et al. 2013. Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Measures in Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs). Geneva: ICTSD.Google Scholar
George, C. 2014. “Environment and Regional Trade Agreements: Emerging Trends and Policy Drivers,” OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Hall, P. A. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policy Making in Britain,” Comparative Politics 25(3):275–96.Google Scholar
Helble, M. 2017. “Salvaging the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Building Blocks for Regional and Multilateral Trade Opening?” ADBI Working Papers 695.Google Scholar
Herman, L. 2010. “Multilateralizing Regionalism: The Case of E-Commerce,” OECD Trade Policy Papers 99, Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmbjx6gw69x-en.Google Scholar
Hoekman, B. and Winters, L.A.. 2009. “Multilateralizing ‘Deep Regional Integration’: A Developing Country Perspective,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds.), Multilateralizing Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 636–79.Google Scholar
Hollway, J., Morin, J.-F., and Pauwelyn, J.. 2018. Endogenous Legal Innovation in the Global Trade Governance Complex. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Horn, H., Mavroidis, P. C., and Sapir, A.. 2010. “Beyond the WTO? An Anatomy of EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements,” The World Economy 33(11):1565–88.Google Scholar
Jetschke, A. and Lenz, T.. 2013. “Does Regionalism Diffuse? A New Research Agenda for the Study of Regional Organizations,” Journal of European Public Policy 20(4):626–37.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B, Lipson, C., and Snidal, D.. 2001. “The Rational Design of International Institutions,” International Organization 55(4):761–99.Google Scholar
Kotschwar, B. 2009. “Mapping Investment Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Towards an International Investment Regime?” In: Estevadeordal, A., Suominen, K. and Teh, R. (Eds.), Regional Rules in the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365–417.Google Scholar
Lejárraga, I. 2014. “Deep Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: How Multilateral-friendly? An Overview of OECD Findings,” OECD Trade Policy Papers 168, Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jxvgfn4bjf0-en.Google Scholar
Martínez-Zarzoso, I. and Oueslati, W.. 2016. “Are Deep and Comprehensive Regional Trade Agreements Helping to Reduce Air Pollution?” CEGE Discussion Papers.Google Scholar
Miroudot, S., Sauvage, J., and Sudreau, M.. 2010. “Multilateralising Regionalism: How Preferential Are Services Commitments in Regional Trade Agreements?” OECD Trade Policy Working Papers 106.Google Scholar
Monteiro, J. A. 2016. Typology of Environment-Related Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements. Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. 2009. “Multilateralizing TRIPs-Plus Agreements: Is the US Strategy a Failure?” The Journal of World Intellectual Property 12(3):175–97.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Bialais, C.. 2018. “Strengthening Multilateral Environmental Governance Through Bilateral Trade Deals.” CIGI Policy Brief 123.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Bluemer, D., Brandi, C. and Berger, A.. 2019. “Kick-starting diffusion: Explaining the varying frequency of PTA’s environmental clauses by their initial conditions.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Dür, A., and Lechner, L.. 2018. “Mapping the Trade and Environment Nexus: Insights from a New Dataset,” Global Environmental Politics 18(1):122–39.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gagné, G.. 2007. “What Can Best Explain the Prevalence of Bilateralism in the Investment Regime?” International Journal of Political Economy 36(1):53–74.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gauquelin, M.. 2016. “Trade Agreements as Vectors for the Nagoya Protocol’s Implementation,” CIGI Paper 115.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gauthier-Nadeau, R.. 2017. “Environmental Gems in Trade Agreements: Little Known Clauses for Progressive Trade Agreements,” CIGI Paper.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Jinnah, S.. 2018. “The Untapped Potential of Preferential Trade Agreements for Climate Governance,” Environmental Politics 27(3):541–65.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Michaud, N., and Bialais, C.. 2016. “Trade Negotiations and Climate Governance: The EU As a Pioneer, but Not (yet) a Leader,” IDDRI Issue Brief 10:16.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Pauwelyn, J., and Hollway, J.. 2017. “The Trade Regime as a Complex Adaptive System: Exploration and Exploitation of Environmental Norms in Trade Agreements,” Journal of International Economic Law 20(2):365–90.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Rochette, M.. 2017. “Transatlantic Convergence of PTA’s Environmental Clauses,” Business and Politics 19(4):621–58.Google Scholar
OECD. 2007. Joint Working Party on Trade and Environment: Regional Trade Agreements and Environment, COM/ENV/TD(2006)47/FINAL.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2009. “Legal Avenues to “Multilateralizing Regionalism: Beyond Article XXIV1,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds.), Multilateralizing Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System 6. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 368–99.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2014. “At the Edge of Chaos? Foreign Investment Law As a Complex Adaptive System, How It Emerged and How It Can Be Reformed,” ICSID Review 29(2):372–418.Google Scholar
Schill, S. W. 2009. The Multilateralization of International Investment Law, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Notten, P., Rotmans, J., Van Asselt, M., and Rothman, D.. 2003. “An Updated Scenario Typology,” Futures 35(5):423–43.Google Scholar
WTO. 2011. World Trade Report 2011. The WTO and Preferential Trade Agreements: From Co-existence. Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar

References

Abbott, K. W., Keohane, R. O., Moravcsik, A., Slaughter, A.-M. and Snidal, D.. 2000. “The Concept of Legalization,” International Organization 54(3): 40119.Google Scholar
Aggarwal, V. K. and Govella, K.. 2013. Linking Trade and Security: Evolving Institutions and Strategies in Asia, Europe, and the United States. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bartels, L. 2004. “A Legal Analysis of Human Rights Clauses in the European Union’s Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements,” Mediterranean Politics 9(3): 368–95.Google Scholar
Bartholomew, D. J., Knott, M. and Moustaki, I.. 2011. Latent Variable Models and Factor Analysis: A Unified Approach. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J. 2000. “On Thinking Clearly about the Linkage between Trade and the Environment,” Environment and Development Economics 5(4): 485–96.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J. 2002. “Afterword: The Question of Linkage,” The American Journal of International Law 96(1): 126–34.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J. and Srinivasan, T. N.. 1996. “Trade and the Environment: Does Environmental Diversity Detract from the Case for Free Trade?” In: Bhagwati, J. N. and Hudec, R. E. (Eds.), Fair Trade and Harmonization: Prerequisites for Free Trade? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Esty, D. C. 2001. “Bridging the Trade-Environment Divide,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 15(3): 113–30.Google Scholar
Franck, T. M. 1990. The Power of Legitimacy among Nations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greif, A., Milgrom, P. and Weingast, B. R.. 1994. “Coordination, Commitment, and Enforcement: The Case of the Merchant Guild,” Journal of Political Economy 102(4):745–76.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, E. M. 2009. Forced to Be Good: Why Trade Agreements Boost Human Rights. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, D. G., Nielson, D. L. and Tierney, M. J.. 2008. Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, D. W. 2010. “Estimating the Effects of Human Rights Treaties on State Behaviour,” Journal of Politics 72(4):1161–76.Google Scholar
Holsti, K. J. 1986. “Politics in Command: Foreign Trade as National Security Policy,” International Organization 40(3):643–71.Google Scholar
Kim, M. 2012. “Ex Ante Due Diligence: Formation of PTAs and Protection of Labour Rights,” International Studies Quarterly 56(4):704–19.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B. and Hong, M. H.. 2010. “The Rational Design of Human Rights Agreements.” APSA 2010 Annual Meeting Paper.Google Scholar
Kravchenko, S. 2007. “The Aarhus Convention and Innovations in Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements,” Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 18(1):2–50.Google Scholar
Krugman, P. 1997. “What Should Trade Negotiators Negotiate About?” Journal of Economic Literature 35(1):113–20.Google Scholar
Lechner, L. 2016. “The Domestic Battle over the Design of Non-Trade Issues in Preferential Trade Agreements,” Review of International Political Economy 23(5):840–71.Google Scholar
Limão, N. 2007. “Are Preferential Trade Agreements with Non-trade Objectives a Stumbling Block for Multilateral Liberalization?” Review of Economic Studies 74(3):821–55.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. B. 1994. “Regime Design Matters: Intentional Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance,” International Organization 48(3):425–58.Google Scholar
Mitchell, S. M. and Hensel, P. R.. 2007. “International Institutions and Compliance with Agreements,” American Journal of Political Science 51(4):721–37.Google Scholar
ORF. (2016). “Demo gegen CETA und TTIP auch in Innsbruck,” https://tirol.orf.at/news/stories/2797222/.Google Scholar
Postnikov, E. 2014. “The Design of Social Standards in EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements,” In: Deese, D. A. (Ed.), Handbook of the International Political Economy of Trade. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 531–49.Google Scholar
Rasch, G. 1980. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Skjaerseth, J. B. 1998. “The Making and Implementation of North Sea Commitments: The Politics of Environmental Participation,” In: Victor, D., Raustiala, K. and Skolnikoff, E. B. (Eds.), The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Spilker, G. and Böhmelt, T.. 2012. “The Impact of Preferential Trade Agreements on Governmental Repression Revisited,” The Review of International Organizations 8(3):343–61.Google Scholar
Sprecher, C., Krause, V. and Powers, K. L.. 2006. “Dispute Initiation and Alliance Obligations in Regional Economic Institutions,” Journal of Peace Research 43(4):453–71.Google Scholar
Standard. 2016. “Tausende protestierten gegen CETA und TTIP,” https://derstandard.at/2000044524696/Grossdemos-gegenCETA-und-TTIP-am-Samstag.Google Scholar
Stone, R. W. 2012. Lending Credibility: The International Monetary Fund and the Post-Communist Transition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×