IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v51y1997i03p365-387_44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chasing Phantoms: The Political Economy of USTR

Author

Listed:
  • Noland, Marcus

Abstract

Trade barriers, though usually considered welfare-reducing, are globally ubiquitous. In light of the enormous clash between what is and what ought to be, researchers have begun addressing the question of why countries so consistently pursue such apparently counterproductive policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Noland, Marcus, 1997. "Chasing Phantoms: The Political Economy of USTR," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 365-387, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:51:y:1997:i:03:p:365-387_44
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818397440122/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Noland, Marcus, 1996. "Trade, investment, and economic conflict between the United States and Asia," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 435-458.
    2. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Shang-Jin Wei, 2007. "Assessing China's exchange rate regime [‘Working with the IMF to strengthen exchange rate surveillance’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 22(51), pages 576-627.
    3. Wickes, Ron, 2021. "Trade deficits and trade conflict: The United States and Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    4. Byron Gangnes & Craig Parsons, 2007. "Have US–Japan Trade Agreements Made a Difference?," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 548-566.
    5. Greaney, Theresa M., 2005. "Measuring network effects on trade: Are Japanese affiliates distinctive?," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 194-214, June.
    6. Kimberly Ann Elliott & J. David Richardson, 1997. "Determinants and Effectiveness of "Aggressively Unilateral" U.S. Trade Actions," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of US Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 215-243, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Takaaki Masaki & Bradley C. Parks, 2020. "When do performance assessments influence policy behavior? Micro-evidence from the 2014 Reform Efforts Survey," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 371-408, April.
    8. C. Randall Henning, 2007. "Congress, Treasury, and the Accountability of Exchange Rate Policy: How the 1988 Trade Act Should Be Reformed," Working Paper Series WP07-8, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    9. kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Young, Linda M. & Hansen, Kathleen C., 2011. "Disconnections in US and EU Agricultural Policy and Trade Negotiations: A Transaction Cost Politics Approach," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, February.
    11. Pekkanen Saadia M & Tsai Kellee S, 2011. "The Politics of Ambiguity in Asia's Sovereign Wealth Funds," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-46, August.

    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:cup:intorg:v:51:y:1997:i:03:p:365-387_44. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.