| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
108704
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Agricultural liberalization is one of the most contentious trade issues in Japan and Korea. Yet, important differences characterize the Japanese and Korean governments' positions on agricultural liberalization when negotiating on free trade agreements (FTA). The Korean government supports substantial agricultural liberalization, whereas the Japanese government is reluctant to abandon farm interests even at the risk of undermining its FTAs. Given strong similarities in their agricultural structure and politics, how do you explain divergent government positions between Japan and Korea? The structure of a country's domestic trade governance largely explains the Japanese and Korean governments' varying approach to agricultural liberalization during FTA negotiations. Domestic trade governance refers to the decision-making structure and process on foreign economic policies. Cohesive domestic trade governance enabled the Korean government to pursue agricultural liberalization under the broader national agenda of promoting trade through FTAs. In contrast, fragmented domestic trade governance gave disproportionately larger weight to agricultural interests within the Japanese government, ultimately allowing agriculture to undermine the success of Japan's FTAs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
076024
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
114563
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
078661
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Agriculture has been the most contentious issue in the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations, and the European Union (EU) intervenes substantially in agricultural markets. This paper reviews these interventions in light of the EU's participation in the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations with specific attention to Asia. It concludes that the offers made by the EU were designed precisely to avoid any real liberalization in its agricultural markets and have undermined the development aspirations of the round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
179148
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Ted Woodfield reflects on Mike Moore's trade negotiation legacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
124725
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
When the European Union (EU) and the Canadian government announced the launching of negotiations to create a "new generation" free trade agreement, the EU insisted that provincial representatives be included on the Canadian negotiating team. The goal of this article is to explain why the provinces have gradually become key, indeed indispensable, actors in international trade negotiations. I examine how international trade negotiations are conducted in Canada, noting the enhanced role for provincial governments, and I focus on a comparison between the Canada-US free trade negotiations and the discussions for a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
076022
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article considers bargaining strategies used by government negotiators in the context of bilateral trade disputes. I argue that trade officials reach the most durable agreements by using an integrative, or value-creating, strategy and avoiding the use of threats. By contrast, a highly distributive, value-claiming strategy coupled with loud public threats is unlikely to result in a durable agreement and frequently leads to deadlocked negotiations. The irony, however, is that American officials use the latter approach more frequently than the former in bilateral trade disputes. These strategies are usually chosen unconsciously in response to perceptions of losses that drive negotiators to select risky approaches to resolve disputes.
By examining bargaining strategies in the U.S. disputes with Japan and South Korea over automobiles and auto parts in the 1990s, this article identifies shifts in negotiation strategies. These shifts in approach closely track the outcomes in these two deeply contentious disputes. After protracted and contentious negotiations with Japan, the final outcome represented a failure to achieve the Americans' most important goals. A less confrontational strategy with South Korea ultimately resulted in greater market opening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
084692
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
105184
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines how external events grounded in a negotiation's relevant environment (i.e., negotiation context) influence negotiation process and outcome. Multilateral, regional and bilateral environments are examined through linkage theory to gain understanding about the impact of external events or context on negotiation process and outcome. Linkages between a negotiation and its context are examined through five trade negotiations: the WTO Doha round (multilateral-global); the Free Trade Area of the Americas (multilateral-regional); EU-Mercosur (bilateral-regional); EU-Chile (bilateral); and US-Chile (bilateral). In addition to developing greater understanding about the strategic relationship between a negotiation and its context this article establishes a theoretic framework that defines the known universe of linkage dynamics. The impact of multilateral environments on the regional negotiation process and outcome is of particular interest, as is the strategic use of bilateral environments in seeking to achieve multilateral geopolitical ends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
165682
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The UK ‘Brexit referendum’ set in motion a unique and highly complex set of negotiations to withdraw from a fundamentally embedded economic and political union. The final referendum was preceded by a nine-month pre-negotiation phase; this article examines the dynamics of that stage. The context of a unilaterally initiated negotiation, together with the economic and political costs associated with it, distinguish it from the existing literature. Three analytical approaches are combined and built upon in this article: the tasks of the pre-negotiation phase, the readiness of the temporal moment, and the demands of multi-level, multi-party negotiations. The concept of psychological readiness has broad theoretical import, though explicit recognition is given that negotiators are not unitary decision makers and that the incorporation of a political analysis is required. The combination of these frameworks provides insight into the dynamics of this phase and the difficulties experienced by both the UK and EU27.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|