IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v11y2020i4p448-457.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Breaking Gridlock: How Path Dependent Layering Enhances Resilience in Global Trade Governance

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Faude

Abstract

What are the implications of the proliferating preferential trade agreements (PTAs) for the liberal trade order? Many scholars and practitioners see large increases in PTAs as a destabilizing factor that undermines core features of the post‐war international trade system. By contrast, this paper argues that the accelerated growth of PTAs since the mid‐1990s enhances the resilience of the liberal trade order. PTAs increase the ability of the order to accommodate heterogeneous preferences and distributive conflicts. They represent a continuation of a longer path of liberalization set in motion by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). This path‐dependent development created conditions for a gradual expansion of the membership and the regulatory scope of the GATT/WTO system, but also heightened levels of preference heterogeneity and distributive conflicts. By enabling groups of states with homogenous preferences to layer new rules on top of the multilateral GATT/WTO system, PTAs enable the continuation of the liberalization path. Consequently, PTAs have served as complements rather than to undermine the WTO.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Faude, 2020. "Breaking Gridlock: How Path Dependent Layering Enhances Resilience in Global Trade Governance," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(4), pages 448-457, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:4:p:448-457
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12822
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12822?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Baldwin, 2016. "The World Trade Organization and the Future of Multilateralism," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(1), pages 95-116, Winter.
    2. Fioretos, Orfeo, 2011. "Historical Institutionalism in International Relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 367-399, April.
    3. Irwin,Douglas A. & Mavroidis,Petros C. & Sykes,Alan O., 2008. "The Genesis of the GATT," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521515610, January.
    4. Baccini, Leonardo & Dür, Andreas, 2015. "Investment discrimination and the proliferation of preferential trade agreements," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62305, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Kim, Soo Yeon & Manger, Mark S., 2017. "Hubs of Governance: Path Dependence and Higher-Order Effects of Preferential Trade Agreement Formation," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 467-488, July.
    6. Richard E. Baldwin, 2011. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocks on the Path to Global Free Trade," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. World Trade Organization,, 2017. "The WTO Agreements," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108423823, January.
    8. Andreas Dür & Leonardo Baccini & Manfred Elsig, 2014. "The design of international trade agreements: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 353-375, September.
    9. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    10. Bhagwati, Jagdish, 2008. "Termites in the Trading System: How Preferential Agreements Undermine Free Trade," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195331653.
    11. Raustiala, Kal & Victor, David G., 2004. "The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-309, April.
    12. Thomas Hale & David Held & Kevin Young, 2013. "Gridlock: From Self-reinforcing Interdependence to Second-order Cooperation Problems," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 4(3), pages 223-235, September.
    13. Gary Hufbauer & Cathleen Cimino, 2013. "What Future for the WTO?," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 394-410, December.
    14. World Trade Organization,, 2017. "The WTO Agreements," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108438438, January.
    15. Jan Karlas & Michal Parízek, 2019. "The Process Performance of the WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism: Peer‐Reviewing Reconsidered," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(3), pages 376-384, September.
    16. Stephen, Matthew D., 2014. "Rising powers, global capitalism and liberal global governance: A historical materialist account of the BRICs challenge," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 20(4), pages 912-938.
    17. Pratt, Tyler, 2018. "Deference and Hierarchy in International Regime Complexes," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 561-590, July.
    18. Dür, Andreas & Baccini, Leonardo & Elsig, Manfred, 2014. "The design of international trade agreements: introducing a new dataset," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59179, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Baldwin, Richard, 2011. "21st century regionalism: Filling the gap between 21st century trade and 20th century trade rules," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2011-08, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    20. Thomas Gehring & Benjamin Faude, 2014. "A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 471-498, December.
    21. Paul Collier, 2006. "Why the WTO is Deadlocked: And What Can Be Done About It," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1423-1449, October.
    22. Aggarwal, Vinod K & Evenett, Simon, 2013. "A Fragmenting Global Economy: A Weakened WTO, Mega FTAs, and Murky Protectionism," CEPR Discussion Papers 9781, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    23. repec:oup:jieclw:v:20:y:2017:i:2:p:333-363. is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Finalyzson, Jock A. & Zacher, Mark W., 1981. "The GATT and the regulation of trade barrier: regime dynamics and functions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 561-602, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eugénia C. Heldt & Patrick A. Mello & Anna Novoselova & Omar Ramon Serrano Oswald, 2022. "Persistence Against the Odds: How Entrepreneurial Agents Helped the UN Joint Inspection Unit to Prevail," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(2), pages 235-246, May.
    2. Walid Tijerina, 2021. "Come In, We’re Open (and Flexible): Trade Openness, Labour Flexibility, and Varieties of Capitalism," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(5), pages 613-624, November.
    3. Kenneth W. Abbott & Benjamin Faude, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 263-291, April.
    4. Karen J. Alter, 2022. "The promise and perils of theorizing international regime complexity in an evolving world," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 375-396, April.
    5. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Faude, Benjamin, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 109882, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Faude, Benjamin, 2020. "Breaking gridlock: how path dependent layering enhances resilience in global trade governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103927, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Stephen, Matthew D. & Parízek, Michal, 2019. "New Powers and the Distribution of Preferences in Global Trade Governance: From Deadlock and Drift to Fragmentation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(6), pages 735-758.
    3. Kenneth W. Abbott & Benjamin Faude, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 263-291, April.
    4. Yoram Z. Haftel & Tobias Lenz, 2022. "Measuring institutional overlap in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 323-347, April.
    5. Andrew Lugg, 2024. "Re-contracting intergovernmental organizations: Membership change and the creation of linked intergovernmental organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 545-577, September.
    6. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    7. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Bernhard Reinsberg & Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "The global governance of international development: Documenting the rise of multi-stakeholder partnerships and identifying underlying theoretical explanations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 59-94, January.
    9. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Faude, Benjamin, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 109882, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Fuß, Julia & Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian & Saravia, Andrés & Zürn, Michael, 2021. "Managing regime complexity: Introducing the interface conflicts 1.0 dataset," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2021-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    11. Sébastien Miroudot & Davide Rigo, 2019. "Preferential Trade Agreements and Multinational Production," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/14, European University Institute.
    12. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    13. Mrázová, Monika & Vines, David & Zissimos, Ben, 2013. "Is the GATT/WTO's Article XXIV bad?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 216-232.
    14. Eckhardt, Jappe & Serrano, Omar, 2014. "Economic Integration and Rivalry in Asia: Comparing Regional Trade Strategies of China and India," Papers 762, World Trade Institute.
    15. Milena Kern & Jörg Paetzold & Hannes Winner, 2021. "Cutting red tape for trade in services," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(10), pages 2858-2886, October.
    16. Gabriel Felbermayr & Benedikt Heid & Mario Larch, 2015. "TTIP: Small Gains, High Risks?," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 15(04), pages 20-30, January.
    17. Michael Blanga-Gubbay & Paola Conconi & Mathieu Parenti, 2020. "Globalization for Sale," CESifo Working Paper Series 8239, CESifo.
    18. Pushkar Pushp & Arbuda Sharma & Faisal Ahmed, 2024. "Flexibility in the WTO: Navigating the Dynamics of Multilateralism Using Grounded Theory," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 25(4), pages 805-823, December.
    19. Manfred Elsig & Sebastian Klotz, 2021. "Digital Trade Rules in Preferential Trade Agreements: Is There a WTO Impact?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S4), pages 25-36, May.
    20. Bouzas, Roberto & Zelicovich, Julieta, 2014. "La Organización Mundial de Comercio, los acuerdos mega-regionales y los usos estratégicos del regionalismo/The World Trade Organization, Mega-Regional Trade Agreements and the Strategic Uses of Region," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 32, pages 963-994, Septiembr.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:4:p:448-457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.