Governance of Protectionist Measures within the WTO

Мұқаба

Дәйексөз келтіру

Толық мәтін

Ашық рұқсат Ашық рұқсат
Рұқсат жабық Рұқсат берілді
Рұқсат жабық Тек жазылушылар үшін

Аннотация

The purpose of the study is to determine the prospects for development of protectionism as the dominant paradigm of countries’ economic policies in the context of supranational regulation of international trade within the World Trade Organization (the WTO, Organization). During the study it was found out that the tools of modern protectionism include non-tariff import restriction measures, as well as fiscal and administrative measures to support production and export. The use of these tools contributes to an increase in compensation protectionist measures by trading partners. It was revealed that the WTO mechanisms limit the range of protectionist measures by participating in the provision of balance of interests of the WTO member states. The article concluded that in spite of the WTO crisis, manifested in the inability to reach new agreements based on the principle of consensus due to differences in the goals and interests of the participating member states, the WTO is interested in the safety and functioning of this institution. Participation in the Organization provides relatively non-discriminatory access of goods on foreign markets, and also allows you to defend the interests of the country during discussion of the modernization issues within the existing international trading system. At the same time, as it was noted, in the context of the WTO crisis, alternative platforms for implementation of economic interests of states are becoming regional economic units of different forms of integration.

Авторлар туралы

Tatiana Kolesnikova

Saint-Petersburg State University of Aerospace Instrumentation

Email: kolesnikova-tv@mail.ru
Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor of the Department of International Business Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation

Әдебиет тізімі

  1. Afontsev, S.A. 2020, Politics and economics of trade wars. Zhournal Novoi Ekonomicheskoi Associacii /Journal of the New Economic Association, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 193-198. doi: 10.31737/2221-2264-2020-45-1-9.
  2. Biryukova O.V. Joint Initiatives Instead of Multilateralism: A New Reality for the WTO? MGIMO Review of International Relations. 2021. №14(5). Pp. 167-186. (In Russ.). doi: 10.24833/2071-8160-2021-5-80-167-186.
  3. Bobylev P.M, Semeikin A.Yu. «Green» Protectionism of Europe. Energy policy, 2020. № 10(152). Pp. 24-33. doi: 10.46920/2409-5516_2020_10152_24.
  4. Vinogradov N.A. The role and importance of international organizations in the context of globalization and deglobalization. Actual problems and prospects for the development of the economy: Russian and foreign experience. 2019. № 3(22). Pp. 109-113.
  5. Grinberg R.S., Komolov O.O. (2022). Protectionism in Russia: New trends in the context of the import of institutions. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 15(2), 44-54. doi: 10.15838/esc.2022.2.80.3
  6. Kovalchuk, J.A., Pichkov O.V., Stepnov I.M. The Integration Role of State Regulation and State Support For Research And Technological Development. Drukerovskij vestnik. 2019. № 4(30). Pp. 70-83. doi: 10.17213/2312-6469-2019-4-70-83.
  7. Milovidov, V. D., & Asker-Zade, N. V. Protectionism 2.0: New reality in the age of globalisation. World Economy and International Relations. 2020. №64(8), Pp. 37-45. doi: 10.20542/0131-2227-2020-64-8-37-45
  8. Obolenskiy, V.P. From Legitimate Protectionism to Trade Wars? World Economy and International relations, 2018, vol. 62, No. 9, pp. 18-25. doi: 10.20542/0131-2227-2018-62-9-18-25.
  9. Peshkova, G. Yu., Bondar E. G. Problems and prospects of revival of peat industry. Economics and Entrepreneurship. 2020. № 12(125). Pp. 58-62. doi: 10.34925/EIP.2021.125.12.009.
  10. Portanskiy A. The Imperative of WTO Reform in an Era of Rising Protectionism and Trade Wars. International Organisations Research Journal, 2019. vol. 14, no 2, pp. 238-251 (in Russian and English). doi: 10.17323/1996-7845-2019-02-12.
  11. Portanskiy A. Russia’s approaches to reform of the WTO. Trade policy. 2020. № 2(22). Pp. 25-29. doi: 10.17323/2499-9415-2020-2-22-25-29.
  12. Sidorov, A. A. Features of the modern protectionism of the USA and the EU towards Russia. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta. 2022. №15(4). Pp. 44-64. doi: 10.24833/2071-8160-2022-4-85-44-64
  13. Smbatyan A.S. Novelties in EU Anti-Dumping policy and WTO Rules. Russian foreign economic bulletin. 2020. № 11. Pp. 16-35. doi: 10.24411/2072-8042-2020-10109.
  14. Smirnov, E. N., &Lukyanov, S. A. International Political Economy of Preferential Trade Agreements. World Economy and International Relations. 2022. №66(5). Pp. 32-40. doi: 10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-5-32-40.
  15. Stepnov I.M., Kovalchuk, J.A. The Prospects of Forming Export Oriented Sectoral Digital Platforms within the Framework of Developing Ecosystems in Industry. Economics. Taxes. Law. 2019. № 4. Pp. 6-19. doi: 10.26794/1999-849X-2019-12-4-6-19.
  16. Balogh, J. M., & Mizik, T. Trade-climate nexus: A systematic review of the literature. Economies. 2021. № 9(3). doi: 10.3390/economies9030099.
  17. De Melo, M. L. Protection of domestic investors under the WTO and international investment regimes. World Trade Review. 2020. № 19(4). Pp. 589-604. doi: 10.1017/S1474745620000142.
  18. Delev, C. (2022). Straining the spaghetti bowl: Re-evaluating the regulation of preferential rules of origin. Journal of International Economic Law, 25(1), Pp. 25-44. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgac001.
  19. Ikejiaku, B., &Dayao, C. (2021). Competition law as an instrument of protectionist policy: Comparative analysis of the EU and the US. Utrecht Journal of International and European Law. 2021. №36(1). Pp. 75-94. doi: 10.5334/UJIEL.513.
  20. Jiang, F. Environmental protection, China and International Trade: Greening the WTO ban on Chinese Export duties. Environmental protection, china and international trade: Greening the WTO ban on Chinese Export duties. 2021. Pp. 1-228. doi: 10.4324/9781003162339.
  21. Jillani, A. S., & Wu, X. Article 25 as an alternate way to resolve the crisis of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism: A Chinese perspective. China and WTO Review. 2021. №7(1). Pp. 153-170. doi: 10.14330/cwr.2021.7.1.07.
  22. Jones, K. (2021). Populism and trade: The challenge to the global trading system. Populism and trade: The challenge to the global trading system. 2021. Pp. 1-260. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780190086350.001.0001.
  23. Karim, R., Syed, R. F., & Islam, M. T. Trade protectionism & China’s international trade disputes: Renewable energy perspectives. China and WTO Review. 2022. №8(1). Pp. 107-126. doi: 10.14330/cwr.2022.8.1.04.
  24. Kim, K., &Roh, J. US anti-dumping practices evolving against market economies. World Trade Review. 2022. №21(4). Pp. 479-496. doi: 10.1017/S1474745622000143
  25. Krapohl, S., Ocelík, V., &Walentek, D. M. (2021). The instability of globalization: Applying evolutionary game theory to global trade cooperation. Public Choice. 2021. №188(1-2). Pp. 31-51. doi: 10.1007/s11127-020-00799.
  26. Martins, M. M. V., &Burnquist, H. L. Impact of Non-tariff Barriers in the Context of the EU-Mercosur Agreement. 2021. №9(1). Pp. 51-69. doi: 10.5752/P.2317-773X.2021V9N1P51-69.
  27. Park, S. Protectionism as challenges for the global trade governance. The future of global economic governance: Challenges and prospects in the age of uncertainty. 2020. Pp. 87-100.doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-35336-0_7.
  28. Petersmann, E. Economic disintegration? Political, economic, and legal drivers and the need for «greening embedded trade liberalism». Journal of International Economic Law. 2020. №23(2). Pp. 347-370. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgaa005.
  29. Sishi, Q., Ji'An, T., Feng, L., Shuqian, S., &Shiying, L. Research and practice of quantitative models on the freedom of trade based on AHP-FCE method: Taking major countries in WTO as examples. Paper presented at the E3S Web of Conferences. 2020. Pp. 214. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202021401048.
  30. Talalova, L. N., &Tian, J. Case analysis of USA anti-dumping to China’s color TV sets. 2021. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-59126-7_165.
  31. Vahalík, B., &Fojtíková, L. The effects of trade policy on trade among the EU and BRICS countries. EkonomickyCasopis. 2020. №68(9). Pp.918-938. doi: 10.31577/ekoncas.2020.09.03.
  32. Xu, M. Effect evaluation of WTO dispute settlement mechanism based on artificial neural network. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing. 2022. doi: 10.1155/2022/5196698.
  33. Yang, X., &Qu, S. China-U.S. trade friction under trade unilateralism and china's legal responses. Contemporary Chinese Political Economy and Strategic Relations. 2020. №6(2). Pp. 655-691.
  34. Zuev, V. (2022). Regional Trade Agreements: A Hope or a Threat to the Global Trade? In: Karhu, A., Haaja, E. (eds) Global Trade and Trade Governance During De-Globalization. International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-13757-0_4.

Қосымша файлдар

Қосымша файлдар
Әрекет
1. JATS XML


Осы сайт cookie-файлдарды пайдаланады

Біздің сайтты пайдалануды жалғастыра отырып, сіз сайттың дұрыс жұмыс істеуін қамтамасыз ететін cookie файлдарын өңдеуге келісім бересіз.< / br>< / br>cookie файлдары туралы< / a>