DOCSLIB.ORG

3. the Global Economy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
3. the Global Economy A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Emmerson, Carl (Ed.); Johnson, Paul (Ed.); Miller, Helen (Ed.) Research Report IFS green budget: February 2014 IFS Report, No. R91 Provided in Cooperation with: Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London Suggested Citation: Emmerson, Carl (Ed.); Johnson, Paul (Ed.); Miller, Helen (Ed.) (2014) : IFS green budget: February 2014, IFS Report, No. R91, ISBN 978-1-909463-35-6, Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London, http://dx.doi.org/10.1920/re.ifs.2014.0091 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/119780 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu The IFS Green Budget The IFS Green Budget The IFS Green Budget Since 1982, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS)’s annual Green Budget has examined the challenges and choices confronting the Chancellor of the Exchequer as he prepares his keynote statement on fiscal policy and the economy. As the government continues to have to contend with the consequences year’s Green Budget include: of the Great Recession for the public finances and household incomes, the issues discussed in this • The outlook for the global economy and the UK economy • The planned fiscal consolidation and risks to the outlook for government borrowing • Policies aimed at stimulating the housing market and boosting homeownership 2014 • Options for reforming state support for childcare 20I 20I 20I • The squeeze on household living standards and possible policy responses to help the low paid 3 3 3 The IFS Green Budget • Options for government intervention in energy markets • Policy options for reforming business rates Funded by the Nuffield Foundation • Potential improvements to the taxation of private pensions February 2014 InstituteInstituteInstitute for forfor Fiscal FiscalFiscal Studies StudiesStudies Tel:Tel: +44 +44 (0) (0) 20 20 7291 7291 4800 4800 Edited by “However uncomfortable it may be, the Fax:Fax: +44 +44 (0) (0) 20 20 7323 7323 4780 4780 Carl Emmerson Paul Johnson Institute for Fiscal Studies tend to get [email protected]@ifs.org.uk “The Institute for Fiscal Studies, the ultimate arbiter of what is and what Helen Miller www.ifs.org.ukwww.ifs.org.uk isn’t doable in the budget” things right and they tend to do things 77 Ridgmount Ridgmount Street Street Larry Elliott, The Guardian in a fair way” LondonLondon WC1E WC1E 7AE 7AE With analysis from “It [IFS] has become known as the institution that tells you the truth about Ed Balls the Budget” ISBN:ISBN:ISBN:ISBN: 978-1-909463-35-6 978-1-909453- 978-1-909453-978-1-909453-02-802-8 Philip Aldrick, The Telegraph “The much respected independent “The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has achieved almost totemic status in Institute for Fiscal Studies” matters fiscal in Britain.... Its judgement on the annual budget is regarded George Osborne as the one against which everyone else calibrates their own assessment” Hamish McRae, The Independent “The Institute for Fiscal Studies is the most-respected independent auditor of the Treasury’s Budget decisions” Ed Conway, Sky News “The most important review of all economic policies these days tends to come from the independent watchdog, the IFS” Tom Bradby, ITV News 79861 IoFS-COVERS.indd 1 30/01/2014 17:20 The IFS Green Budget February 2014 Stuart Adam Abi Adams Mike Brewer Sarah Cattan Daniel Chandler Claire Crawford Rowena Crawford Richard Disney Carl Emmerson Andrew Goodwin Andrew Hood Cloda Jenkins Robert Joyce Soumaya Keynes Peter Levell Helen Miller David Phillips Oliver Salmon Adam Slater Copy-editor: Judith Payne Editors: Carl Emmerson, Paul Johnson and Helen Miller The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street London WC1E 7AE Published by The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street London WC1E 7AE Tel: +44 (0) 20-7291 4800 Fax: +44 (0) 20-7323 4780 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.ifs.org.uk funded by The Nuffield Foundation 28 Bedford Square London WC1B 3JS http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org with support from The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the Centre for Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy (CPP, reference RES-544-28-5001) http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ analysis from Oxford Economics Abbey House, 121 St Aldates Oxford OX1 1HB http://www.oxfordeconomics.com/ Printed by Pureprint Group, Uckfield © The Institute for Fiscal Studies, February 2014 ISBN 978-1-909463-35-6 Foreword The Nuffield Foundation is again pleased to fund much of the work that informs the IFS Green Budget, as well as its publication. For 32 years the Institute for Fiscal Studies has produced a “Green Budget” – so called by analogy with a ‘green paper’ compared to a ‘white paper’. Published about a month before the Chancellor’s Budget Statement and free of political influence, it provides a detailed and independent analysis of the public finances and Budget policy options. It also plays a crucial role in informing public debate and scrutiny of the Chancellor’s Budget in the weeks and months that follow. The Green Budget has a wide scope – comprising eleven chapters covering all major areas of UK economic policy. The independence of the IFS, along with its ability to consider alternative policy options and a wider range of data than those from government, means its contribution is distinct from that of the Office for Budget Responsibility and other organisations. The Foundation supports the Green Budget in order to promote better and wider debate of the annual Budget and other policy options, based on the transparent presentation of evidence that others can use to formulate their own responses. Some of the work IFS draws on for the Green Budget is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council as part of its support for the IFS Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy, but the Nuffield Foundation is delighted to support the additional analyses and the publication and launch of this important annual volume. Professor David Rhind CBE FRS FBA Chairman of the Trustees of the Nuffield Foundation The Nuffield Foundation is an endowed charitable trust that aims to improve social well- being in the widest sense. It funds research and innovation in education and social policy and also works to build capacity in education, science and social science research. The Nuffield Foundation has funded this project, but the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Foundation. More information is available at http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org. Preface Welcome to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS)’s 2014 Green Budget. In the following pages, we discuss some of the many issues confronting Chancellor George Osborne as he prepares his fifth Budget. Despite the relatively positive recent data, with growth increasing and unemployment falling, the largest challenge for the Chancellor remains having to contend with the consequences of the Great Recession for the public finances and household incomes. In this book, we examine in detail some of the key risks to the Chancellor’s plans for reducing the deficit. We set out in detail what has been happening in the housing market and the role of government policies aimed, at least in part, at boosting homeownership. We also document what has been happening to incomes across the distribution and compare this with the rates of inflation that different types of households have been facing. We examine how the UK energy market operates, and discuss in detail policy options for increasing state support for childcare, improving the taxation of private pensions and reforming business rates. As ever, we collaborate with others to write the macroeconomic chapters. We are grateful to Oxford Economics, and in particular to Andrew Goodwin, Oliver Salmon and Adam Slater, for the chapters they have contributed on the outlook for the UK economy and the global economy. This year we offer our particular thanks to the Nuffield Foundation for the funding it has provided to support the Green Budget. Our most important aim for the Green Budget is to influence policy and inform the public debate. It is particularly appropriate then that it should be supported by the Nuffield Foundation, for which these are also central aims. We are also extremely grateful for the continuing support that ESRC provides for our ongoing research work via the Centre for the Microeconomic Analysis of Public Policy at IFS. This underpins all our analysis in this volume. The Labour Force Survey (LFS), the Family Resources Survey (FRS) and the Living Costs and Food Survey and its predecessors are Crown Copyright, and are reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland. The LFS is produced by the Office for National Statistics and the FRS is produced by the Department for Work and Pensions; both are distributed by the UK Data Archive (UKDA).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trade's Security Exceptionalism
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 2020 Trade's Security Exceptionalism Kathleen Claussen Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the International Trade Law Commons, and the National Security Law Commons ARTICLE Trade's Security Exceptionalism Kathleen Claussen- Abstract. At the core of U.S. trade law is an under-studied structural dichotomy. On the one hand, well-established statutory authorities enable the President to eliminate trade barriers through negotiations with U.S. trading partners. On the other hand, different, lesser-known authorities allow the President to erect trade barriers on an exceptional basis where necessary for U.S. economic security. Rather than thinking of free trade as a source of or tool for economic security as political theorists long have, our law codifies these authorities as though they are in contrast to one another-allowing departures from the free trade norm when security so demands. Further, the two categories of authorities suffer from a mismatch in what I call "trade delegation disciplines": While Congress kept tight controls on the President's free trade negotiations, it abandoned controls on the exceptional, security-driven authorities, empowering the executive to handle U.S. trade interests in an unbridled way that our nation's Founders feared. This Article is the first to identify how trade law has exceptionalized security. It develops an original typology of the categories of congressional delegations that constitute our exceptional trade apparatus. This structural account delivers both positive and normative payoffs.
    [Show full text]
  • The COVID-19 Pandemic and International Trade
    House of Commons International Trade Committee The COVID-19 pandemic and international trade First Report of Session 2019–21 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 23 July 2020 HC 286 Published on 29 July 2020 by authority of the House of Commons The International Trade Committee The International Trade Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for International Trade and its associated public bodies. Current membership Angus Brendan MacNeil MP (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Chair) Robert Courts MP (Conservative, Witney) Mark Garnier MP (Conservative, Wyre Forest) Paul Girvan MP (DUP, South Antrim) Sir Mark Hendrick MP (Labour, Preston) Mark Menzies MP (Conservative, Fylde) Taiwo Owatemi MP (Labour, Coventry North West) Martin Vickers MP (Conservative, Cleethorpes) Matt Western MP (Labour, Warwick and Leamington) Mick Whitley MP (Labour, Birkenhead) Craig Williams MP (Conservative, Montgomeryshire) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2020. This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/copyright. Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/tradecom and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper 19-7: the 2018 US-China Trade Conflict After 40
    WORKING PAPER 19-7 The 2018 US-China Trade Conflict After 40 Years of Special Protection Chad P. Bown April 2019 Abstract In 2018, the United States suddenly increased tariffs on nearly 50 percent of its imports from China. China imme- diately retaliated with tariffs on more than 70 percent of imports from the United States. This paper assesses what happened in 2018 and attempts to explain why. It first constructs a new measure of special tariff protection to put the sheer scope and coverage of the 2018 actions into historical context. It then uses the lens provided by the 2018 special tariffs to explain the key sources of economic and policy friction between the two countries. This includes whether China’s state-owned enterprises and industrial subsidies, as well as China’s development strategy and system of forc- ibly acquiring foreign technology, were imposing increasingly large costs on trading partners. Finally, it also examines whether the US strategy to provoke a crisis—which may result in a severely weakened World Trade Organization— was deliberate and out of frustration with the institution itself. JEL Code: F13 Keywords: Trade war, tariffs, retaliation, WTO Chad P. Bown is the Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Author’s Note: A revised version of this paper is forthcoming in the China Economic Journal. Thanks to Eva Zhang for outstanding research assistance, William Melancon and Melina Kolb for assistance with graphics, and to Peter Schott and Judith Dean for assistance with data. I am also grateful for useful discussions and comments on an earlier draft from William Cline, Anabel Gonzalez, Egor Gornostay, Julien Gourdon, Bernard Hoekman, Gary Hufbauer, Brad Jensen, Soumaya Keynes, Maury Obstfeld, Tom Prusa, and Steve Weisman.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral Evidence: the Covid-19 Pandemic and International Trade, HC 286
    International Trade Committee Oral evidence: The Covid-19 pandemic and international trade, HC 286 Friday 5 June 2020 Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 5 June 2020. Watch the meeting Members present: Angus Brendan MacNeil (Chair); Robert Courts; Mark Garnier; Paul Girvan; Sir Mark Hendrick; Mark Menzies; Martin Vickers; Matt Western; Mick Whitley; Craig Williams. Questions 216 – 238 Witnesses I: Soumaya Keynes, Trade and Globalisation Editor, The Economist Magazine; Professor Simon J. Evenett, Professor of International Trade and Economic Development, University of St. Gallen; and Marianne Petsinger, Senior Research Fellow, US and the Americas Programme, Royal Institute of International Affairs. II: Alan Wolff, Deputy Director-General, World Trade Organisation; and Peter Ungphakorn, former Senior Information Officer, World Trade Organisation. Examination of witnesses Witnesses: Soumaya Keynes, Professor Evenett, and Marianne Petsinger. Q216 Mark Garnier: Good afternoon to everybody. You would normally be expecting to see Angus MacNeil but, unfortunately, due to technology problems beyond anybody’s control, I am stepping in while he gets himself sorted out. Welcome to this afternoon’s session of the International Trade Select Committee’s inquiry on the effect of Covid-19 on international trade. I will start with some questions to you, Professor Evenett. Your organisation, Global Trade Alert, of which you are the co-ordinator, has been tracking global trade policy responses to the Covid-19 pandemic. What are the key features that are emerging from your data? Professor Evenett: This year there have been 579 trade policy changes that we have documented and, not surprisingly, over 330 of them are in the medical goods and medicines sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Transcript
    TRADE-2019/02/01 1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION SAUL/ZILKHA ROOM KIMBERLY CLAUSING: THE PROGRESSIVE CASE FOR FREE TRADE AND GLOBALIZATION Washington, D.C. Friday, February 1, 2019 PARTICIPANTS: Introduction and moderator: DAVID WESSEL Senior Fellow and Director, Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy The Brookings Institution Presentation: KIMBERLY CLAUSING Thormund Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics Reed College Panelists: KIMBERLY ELLIOTT Visiting Fellow Center for Global Development SOUMAYA KEYNES U.S. Economics Editor The Economist LORI WALLACH Director, Global Trade Watch Public Citizen * * * * * ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 600 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 TRADE-2019/02/01 2 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. WESSEL: Good morning. Welcome to Brookings and the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy. I'm impressed to see that all of you have braved what passes for a blizzard in Washington. (Laughter) I want to assure you we have plenty of facilities here if you get trapped because we have an inch and a half of snow. We can take care of you for a few hours. I'm very pleased today to be helping celebrate Kim Clausing's new book, "Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration and Global Capital." The timing couldn't be better. We are, I think since the -- even before the last presidential election, engaged in a huge debate about whether globalization, immigration, free trade, flows of global capital are (a) responsible for everything good that's happened to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Trump Shot the Sheriffs: the End of WTO Dispute Settlement 1.0
    WORKING PAPER 20-4 Why Trump Shot the Sheriffs: The End of WTO Dispute Settlement 1.0 Chad P. Bown and Soumaya Keynes March 2020 ABSTRACT On December 10, 2019, the WTO’s 25-year-old system of resolving disputes Chad P. Bown is the Reginald Jones Senior broke down. This paper explains why. It describes the dysfunctional system that Fellow at the Peterson preceded the WTO, when the United States dealt with politically troublesome Institute for International imports by using voluntary export restraints and increasingly resorted to the Economics. Soumaya Keynes is the Trade and “aggressively unilateral” Section 301 policy to resolve trade concerns. The WTO Globalisation Editor at was a compromise between the rest of the world and the United States, whereby The Economist. the latter accepted some constraints with the expectation that the new system of binding dispute settlement would serve its interests. But although the creation of the WTO resolved some concerns about American unilateralism in the short term, its system of handling disputes turned out to be politically unsustainable. JEL: F13 Keywords: WTO, dispute settlement, Appellate Body, antidumping, trade remedies Authors’ Note: This paper derives from our keynote address at the 20th Judicial Conference of the United States Court of International Trade on November 18, 2019. A revised version is forthcoming in the Journal of Policy Modeling. For helpful suggestions and discussions, we thank Anabel González, Egor Gornostay, Jennifer Hillman, Bernard Hoekman, Robert Koopman, Simon Lester, Petros Mavroidis, Marcus Noland, Jeff Schott, Nicolas Véron, Steve Weisman, and participants at the ASSA 2020 meetings in San Diego.
    [Show full text]
  • Zeitenwende | Wendezeiten
    Zeitenwende Wendezeiten Special Edition of the Munich Security Report on German Foreign and Security Policy October 2020 October 2020 Zeitenwende | Wendezeiten Special Edition of the Munich Security Report on German Foreign and Security Policy Tobias Bunde Laura Hartmann Franziska Stärk Randolf Carr Christoph Erber Julia Hammelehle Juliane Kabus With guest contributions by Elbridge Colby, François Heisbourg, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Andrey Kortunov, Shivshankar Menon, David Miliband, Ana Palacio, Kevin Rudd, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Nathalie Tocci, and Huiyao Wang. Table of Contents Foreword 4 Foreword by former Federal President Joachim Gauck 8 Executive Summary 11 1 Introduction: The Munich Consensus 17 2 Security Situation: Zeitenwende 26 3 Dependencies: Wonderful Together, 50 Vulnerable Together 4 Investments: Instrumental Reasoning 74 5 Public Opinion: Folk Wisdom 106 6 Decision-making Processes: Berlin Disharmonic 144 7 Outlook: Wendezeiten 166 Notes 176 Endnotes 177 List of Figures 203 Image Sources 210 List of Abbreviations 211 Team 214 Acknowledgments 215 Imprint 217 ZEITENWENDE | WENDEZEITEN Foreword Dear Reader, In recent years, the Munich Security Conference (MSC) has highlighted a wide variety of security policy issues at its events in all corners of the world – from Madrid to Minsk, from Tel Aviv to New York, from Abuja Wolfgang Ischinger to Stavanger. In doing so, we focused primarily on international challenges. At our events, however, we were increasingly confronted with questions about Germany’s positions – sometimes with fear and unease about whether Berlin was, for example, taking certain threats seriously enough – but almost always with great expectations of our country. At home, on the other hand, people still regularly underestimate how important our country is now considered to be almost everywhere in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revival of Economic Nationalism and the Global Trading System
    THE REVIVAL OF ECONOMIC NATIONALISM AND THE GLOBAL TRADING SYSTEM Ian M. Sheldon William McGuire Daniel C. K. Chow Cardozo Law Review __ (forthcoming 2019) Legal Studies Working Paper Series No. 441 March 29, 2018 This working paper series is co-sponsored by the Center for Interdisciplinary Law and Policy Studies at the Moritz College of Law This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3152299 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3152299 THE REVIVAL OF ECONOMIC NATIONALISM AND THE GLOBAL TRADING SYSTEM Ian M. Sheldon,∗ Daniel C.K. Chow,∗∗ William McGuire∗∗∗ Cardozo Law Review (forthcoming 2019) ______________________ The election of Donald J. Trump to the US Presidency coincided with the US adoption of an “America First” policy in trade. This policy reflects an underlying theory of economic nationalism that is fundamentally at odds with the current approach of the multilateral trading system established by the GATT/WTO. The current multilateral system is based on a “positive sum game” theory, i.e. the view that cooperative trade concessions can increase the volume of trade for all nations involved and result in reciprocal and mutual benefits. A large body of theoretical and empirical work, discussed and analyzed in this Article, supports the conclusion that the GATT/WTO system has historically achieved significantly increased trade volumes on both a multilateral and national scale since its creation at the end of the Second World War. By contrast, President Trump’s economic nationalism holds that trade is a “zero sum game” in which a gain in trade by one nation must be accompanied by a corresponding trade loss by another nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Meredith A. Crowley
    Meredith A. Crowley Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge Austin Robinson Building Sidgwick Avenue Cambridge, CB3 9DD, UK tel: +44 1223 335261 [email protected] http://meredithcrowley.weebly.com/ Current positions/affiliations/honors University of Cambridge Reader in International Economics, Faculty of Economics 2018 – present Keynes Fellow, University of Cambridge 2019 – present Fellow, St. John’s College 2013 – present University Lecturer, Faculty of Economics 2013 – 2018 Cambridge-INET (Institute for New Economic Thinking) Coordinator, Transmission Mechanisms and Economic Policy 2018 – present UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE), London, UK ESRC Senior Fellow 2019 – present Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), London, UK Research Fellow 2016 – present UK Department for International Trade, London, UK Trade and Economy Panel (Academic Advisor) 2019 – present Freeports Advisory Panel (Academic Advisor) 2019 – present Trade and Agriculture Commission (Competitiveness Working Group Member) 2020 – present Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Kiel, Germany Member of the Scientific Advisory Council 2019 – present UK Department for Food, Agriculture and Rural Affairs, London, UK National Food Strategy Advisory Panel (Academic Advisor) 2019 – present UK Government Office for Science, Rebuilding a Resilient Britain Project 2020 – present Trade and Aid Working Group Member Previous positions/appointments/honors Bruegel, Brussels, Belgium Member of the Scientific Council 2018 – 2020 Nanjing University Visiting Professor November 2018 Shanghai University of Finance and Economics Visiting Professor, Summer School 2014, 2015 & 2019 Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Senior Economist 2006 – 2014. Economist 2001 – 2006. American Law Institute Advisor, Principles of the Law of World Trade Project 2008 – 2012. Pew Charitable Trusts Advisory Board Member, Subsidyscope Project 2008 – 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • The Semiconductor Industry Into Its Trade War with China
    WORKING PAPER 20-16 How the United States marched the semiconductor industry into its trade war with China Chad P. Bown December 2020 ABSTRACT The US-China trade war forced a reluctant semiconductor industry into someone Chad P. Bown is else’s fight, a very different position from its leading role in the 1980s trade the Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the conflict with Japan. This paper describes how the political economy of the Peterson Institute global semiconductor industry has evolved since the 1980s. That includes both for International Economics. a shift in the business model behind how semiconductors go from conception to a finished product as well as the geographic reorientation toward Asia of demand and manufactured supply. It uses that lens to explain how, during the modern conflict with China, US policymakers turned to a legally complex set of export restrictions targeting the semiconductor supply chain in the attempt to safeguard critical infrastructure in the telecommunications sector. The potentially far-reaching tactics included weaponization of exports by relatively small but highly specialized American software service and equipment providers in order to constrain Huawei, a Fortune Global 500 company. It describes potential costs of such policies, some of their unintended consequences, and whether policymakers might push them further in the attempt to constrain other Chinese firms. JEL: F13 Keywords: Export restrictions, supply chains, national security, semiconductors, Huawei, US–China trade relations Note: A revised version of this paper will be published in the East Asian Economic Review. It stems from a keynote given at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Global Forum on Productivity 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Biographies of Participants
    11 December 2018 WTO Headquarters, Room W Updating Trade Cooperation: An Economic View Biographies of Participants Kyle Bagwell is the Donald L. Lucas Endowed Professor in Economics at Stanford University. He is also a Senior Fellow of the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and a Faculty Affiliate of the Stanford Center on Global Poverty and Development. He works in the fields of International Trade, Industrial Organization and Game Theory. His research examines a range of theoretical and empirical questions relating to the purpose and design of GATT/WTO. He also explores theories of competition and cooperation in settings where asymmetric information is present. His research has been published in numerous academic journals, and in a book, The Economics of the World Trading System, co-authored with Robert W. Staiger. Emily Blanchard is an Associate Professor at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College and a Research Fellow with the Center for Economic Policy Research. She has written extensively on how foreign investment and global value chains are changing the role of trade agreements in the 21st century, and on how globalization and education shape political and economic outcomes within and across countries. Her research is published in leading journals, including the Review of Economic Studies, Journal of International Economics, the Review of Economics and Statistics, and the World Trade Review. Chad P. Bown is Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. With Soumaya Keynes, he co-hosts Trade Talks, a weekly podcast on the economics of international trade policy.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 – New York
    Hosted by 2019 – NEW YORK 6 - 7 November, New York Programmed by worldtradesymposium.economist.com #worldtrade19 Hosted by PROGRAMME World Trade Symposium New York Open trade in an uncertain world November 6th-7th 2019 ∙ New York Global trade is in a state of upheaval, driven by protectionism, ever-increasing regulations and outdated trading systems. Technology is disrupting trade like never before, making processes more efficient and inclusive, breaking down barriers and opening new markets. These present new challenges—and new opportunities. The World Trade Symposium will convene business leaders, technology innovators, policymakers, thought leaders and economists to analyse these issues and suggest solutions and outcomes. What is needed to drive open trade for the benefit of all involved? Sessions will take a deep dive into the new technologies and platforms that are opening up trade and identify the opportunities presented by changing trends, as well as exploring how shifting consumer priorities are affecting the sustainability agenda. Attendees won’t just be debating key issues and swapping their stories, but will explore new ideas and solutions. CONFERENCE CHAIR SOUMAYA KEYNES, trade and globalisation editor The Economist MODERATORS VIJAY VAITHEESWARAN, US business editor, The Economist CHRISTOPHER CLAGUE, Managing editor, Asia and global editorial lead, trade and globalisation, The Economist Intelligence Unit Programmed by worldtradesymposium.economist.com #worldtrade19 Hosted by PROGRAMME WEDNESDAY 6TH NOVEMBER 12.00 pm Registration and networking lunch 12.45 pm Welcome from Finastra SIMON PARIS, chief executive, Finastra 12.55 pm Chair’s opening remarks SOUMAYA KEYNES, trade and globalisation editor, The Economist 1.05 pm Interview: Reshaping trade patterns Trade and manufacturing policy of the US in the light of trade war.
    [Show full text]