Accueil > Trade and Politics : backlash against globalization

KINT 3045 - Trade and Politics : backlash against globalization

Type d'enseignement : Lecture alone

Semester : Spring 2018-2019

Number of hours : 24

Language of tuition : English

Pre-requisite

aucun

Course Description

Trade is a two-level political game. In the international arena it mimics power relations among major trading partners, whereas on the domestic level it reflects social and political preferences vis a vis trade and globalization. Both levels are deeply intertwined. With Brexit and the election of Donald Trump, trade has become a core issue in both international and domestic politics. In international relations, trade is fuelling competition and tension between the US, China and Europe. In national politics, the debate on free trade has become the main ammunition in the hands of populist movements. Why is trade becoming so important in shaping both global and national agendas? Why in the West, who for so long advocated it, is free trade is becoming the main source of backlash against globalization? How are actors reacting to these challenges? These are the main questions that this course will address. Note that this course is NOT an Economics course. It is more an IPE/IR class.

Teachers

LAIDI, Zaki (Directeur de recherche au CEE, Sciences Po)

Course validation

A midterm paper of 3000 words (40% of the final grade). An in-class final exam (60% of the final grade).

Required reading

  • Evenett, Simon, “Cloth for Wine? The Relevance of Ricardo's Comparative Advantage in the 21st Century” in Vox EU, 2017: https://voxeu.org/content/cloth-wine-relevance-ricardo-s-comparative-advantage-21st-century
  • Baldwin, Richard, “Globalization's Three Unbundlings”, Harvard University Press, 2016: http://harvardpress.typepad.com/hup_publicity/2016/11/globalizations-three-unbundlings-richard-baldwin.html
  • Zeiler, Thomas W., “The Expanding Mandate Of The Gatt: The First Seven Rounds”, in “The Oxford Handbook on the World Trade Organisation”, 2012: http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586103.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199586103-e-6
  • Elsig, M., Hoekman, B., Pauwelyn, J., “Thinking about the performance of the World Trade Organization: A discussion across disciplines”, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, Global Governance Programme-212, 2016: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/39012/RSCAS_2016_13.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  • Laïdi, Zaki, “Towards a post-hegemonic world: The multipolar threat to the multilateral order”, International Politics 51-3, 2014: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/adf8/136da5d5e85d33f5bd6b779314b16bc40702.pdf

Additional required reading

  • Goldstein, Judith, “Trading in the Twenty-First Century: Is There a Role for the World Trade Organization?”, Annual Review of Political Science Volume 20:545-564, 2017: https://www.annualreviews.org/abs/doi/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051215-023043?intcmp=trendmd&
  • Autor, D., Dorn, D., Hanson, G., “The China Shock: Learning from Labor Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade”, IZA Discussion Papers, No. 9748, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), 2016: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/141507/1/dp9748.pdf
  • Wu, Mark, “The ‘China, Inc.' Challenge to Global Trade Governance”, Harvard International Law Journal Volume 57., 2016, pp.1001-1063
  • Hoekman, B., Nelson, D., “21st Century Trade Agreements and the Owl of Minerva”, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, Global Governance Programme-293, 2018: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/50964/RSCAS_2018_04.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  • Bacchus, James, “Was Buenos Aires the Beginning of the End or the End of the Beginning? The Future of the World Trade Organization”, CATO Institute, Policy Analysis No. 841, 2018: https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/was-buenos-aires-beginning-end-or-end-beginning-future-world-trade#full
  • Rodrik, Dani, “Populism and the economics of globalization”, Journal of International Business Policy, 2018: https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/files/dani-rodrik/files/populism_and_the_economics_of_globalization.pdf
  • “Les opinions publiques européennes et américaine, le libre-échange et le protectionnisme”, IFOP Pour Marianne, 2018: http://www.ifop.fr/media/poll/4025-1-study_file.pdf
  • Wolfe, R., Acquaviva, G., “Where does the public sit on NAFTA?”, Policy Options IRPP, 2018: http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/april-2018/public-sit-nafta/
  • Lawrence, Robert Z., “Five Reasons Why The Focus on Trade Deficits is Misleading”, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Policy Brief 18-6, 2018: https://piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/five-reasons-why-focus-trade-deficits-misleading
  • Irwin, Douglas A., “Clashing over Commerce: a History of US Trade Policy”, Chicago University Press, 2017, Chapter 13, pp.625-688: http://catalogue.sciencespo.fr/ark:/46513/sc0001309486
  • Malmström, Cecilia, “Progressive Trade Policy in a More Protectionist World”, European Commissioner Speech at the Canada 2020 Think Tank, 2017: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/march/tradoc_155447.pdf
  • Young, Alasdair R., “Trade Policy in a Changing EU and an Uncertain World”, Center for European and Transatlantic Studies and Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, 2017: https://www.eui.eu/Documents/RSCAS/JMF-25-Presentation/EUI2017-Young.pdf
  • Eichengreen, B., Gupta, P., Kumar, R., “Emerging giants: China and India in the world economy”, Oxford University Press, 2010: http://catalogue.sciencespo.fr/ark:/46513/sc0001197529?mozQuirk=%D0%B6&posInPage=0&bookmark=519c44b6-41fb-4820-b85d-1d587dd271d0&queryid=f72963da-a3eb-41b5-b246-56044bb28774
  • Fewsmith, Joseph, “China and the WTO: The Politics Behind the Agreement”, The National Bureau of Asian Research, 1999: https://www.iatp.org/files/China_and_the_WTO_The_Politics_Behind_the_Agre.htm
  • Garcia-Herrero, A., Sapir, A., “Should the EU have the power to vet foreign takeovers?”, Bruegel Blog, 2017: http://bruegel.org/2017/09/should-the-eu-have-the-power-to-vet-foreign-takeovers/
  • Jackson, James K., “The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)”, Congressional Research Service, 2018: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33388.pdf
  • European Parliament, “Foreign direct investment screening: A debate in light of China-EU FDI flows”, European Parliamentary Research Service, 2017: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/603941/EPRS_BRI(2017)603941_EN.pddf
  • Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), “Key Questions answered on CFIUS”, Latham & Watkins LLP, 2017: https://www.lw.com/thoughtLeadership/committee-foreign-investment-united-states-key-questions-answered-CFIUS
  • Baldwin, Richard, “Globalization is close to its ‘holy cow' moment”, Chicago Booth Review, 2018: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/economics/2018/article/globalization-close-its-holy-cow-moment
  • Rodrik, Dani, “Straight talk on trade: ideas for a sane world economy”, Princeton University Press, 2018: http://catalogue.sciencespo.fr/ark:/46513/sc0001311422?mozQuirk=%D0%B6&posInPage=0&bookmark=5f7d03b6-5e47-49b8-9074-995f74688dcd&queryid=2ae7c402-341c-4ef6-93fe-e04916cd2893 chap 2