IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v8y2005i3p211-233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade versus the environment: Strategic settlement from a systems engineering perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Keith W. Hipel
  • Amer Obeidi

Abstract

The key goal of this research is to employ a Systems Engineering approach to conflict resolution to clearly identify the ubiquitous conflict taking place at the local, national, and global levels between the basic values underlying trading agreements and those principles providing the foundations for environmental stewardship, and to suggest solutions as to how this most basic of disputes can be responsibly resolved. Subsequent to outlining the current situation involving free trade among nations and associated environmental problems, the positions of both sides in this chronic dispute between trade and the environment are summarized. Supporting the stance of free trade is the fundamental driving forces of profit maximization, while in direct opposition to this market‐driven value system are the principles of maintaining a healthy environment and related social welfare objectives. Accordingly, this global clash of values is systematically studied as a game in which the values of the Global Market‐Driven Economy (GMDE) are in confrontation with those of a Sustainable Ecosystem (SES) philosophy. A Systems Engineering tool for strategic analysis, called the Graph Model for Conflict, is utilized for realistically capturing the key characteristics of this type of complex conflict and for providing strategic insights regarding its potential resolutions. In particular, a systematic Graph Model investigation reveals that the environment and social standards will continue to deteriorate if the entrenched positions and related value systems of both camps persist. However, based on the strategic understanding gained from this formal conflict study, a number of positive proposals are put forward for resolving this conflict from a win/win perspective, at least in the long run. To highlight inherent advantages of employing a formal Systems Engineering tool for addressing strategic conflict problems, the application is used for illustrating how the Graph Model can be conveniently applied to a specific dispute and comments regarding the capabilities and benefits of the conflict methodology are provided at each step in the modeling and analysis procedure. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 8: 211–233, 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Keith W. Hipel & Amer Obeidi, 2005. "Trade versus the environment: Strategic settlement from a systems engineering perspective," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 211-233, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:8:y:2005:i:3:p:211-233
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.20031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.20031
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.20031?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. Mansfield, Edward D. & Pevehouse, Jon C., 2000. "Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(4), pages 775-808, October.
    2. Luai Hamouda & D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel, 2004. "Strength of Preference in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 449-462, September.
    3. L Alan Winters, 2004. "Trade Liberalisation and Economic Performance: An Overview," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 4-21, February.
    4. D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & Xiaoyong (John) Peng, 2001. "Coalition Analysis in Group Decision Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 159-175, March.
    5. David Dollar & Aart Kraay, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 22-49, February.
    6. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 11, pages 227-263, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. K W Li & D M Kilgour & K W Hipel, 2005. "Status quo analysis in the graph model for conflict resolution," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(6), pages 699-707, June.
    8. Eglin, Richard, 2001. "Keeping the "T" in the WTO: where to next on environment and labor standards?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 173-191, July.
    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. Leandro Chaves Rêgo & France E. G. Oliveira, 2020. "Higher-order Sequential Stabilities in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution for Bilateral Conflicts," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 601-626, August.
    2. M. Ghanbarpour & Keith Hipel, 2009. "Sustainable development conflict over freeway construction," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 241-253, April.
    3. Takehiro Inohara & Keith W. Hipel, 2008. "Coalition analysis in the graph model for conflict resolution," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 343-359, December.
    4. M. Abul Bashar & Keith W. Hipel & D. Marc Kilgour & Amer Obeidi, 2018. "Interval fuzzy preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 287-315, September.
    5. Annik Magerholm Fet & Erwin M. Schau & Cecilia Haskins, 2010. "A framework for environmental analyses of fish food production systems based on systems engineering principles," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 109-118, June.

    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. Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & D. Marc Kilgour, 2020. "The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: Reflections on Three Decades of Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 11-60, February.
    2. Shawei He, 2019. "Coalition Analysis in Basic Hierarchical Graph Model for Conflict Resolution with Application to Climate Change Governance Disputes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 879-906, October.
    3. Maryam Almasifard & Sasan Torabzadeh Khorasani, 2017. "Relationship Between Domestic Production in Agricultural and Industrial Sectors and Purchasing Power by Controlling for International Trade Variables (Iran)," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 7(4), pages 244-253.
    4. Costantini, Valeria & Monni, Salvatore, 2008. "Environment, human development and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 867-880, February.
    5. Sean B. Walker & Keith W. Hipel, 2017. "Strategy, Complexity and Cooperation: The Sino-American Climate Regime," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 997-1027, September.
    6. Montalbano, Pierluigi, 2011. "Trade Openness and Developing Countries' Vulnerability: Concepts, Misconceptions, and Directions for Research," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1489-1502, September.
    7. Vicard, Vincent, 2012. "Trade, conflict, and political integration: Explaining the heterogeneity of regional trade agreements," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 54-71.
    8. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Jana von Stein & Erik Gartzke, 2008. "International Organizations Count," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(2), pages 175-188, April.
    9. Anderson, Kym & Kurzweil, Marianne & Martin, William J. & Sandri, Damiano & Valenzuela, Ernesto, 2008. "Methodology for Measuring Distortions to Agricultural Incentives," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 48326, World Bank.
    10. Harashima, Taiji, 2009. "Trade Liberalization and Heterogeneous Rates of Time Preference across Countries: A Possibility of Trade Deficits with China," MPRA Paper 19386, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Inohara, Takehiro, 2016. "State transition time analysis in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 274(C), pages 372-382.
    12. Shawei He & Keith Hipel & D. Kilgour, 2014. "Water Diversion Conflicts in China: A Hierarchical Perspective," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(7), pages 1823-1837, May.
    13. Hadjiyiannis, Costas & Heracleous, Maria S. & Tabakis, Chrysostomos, 2016. "Regionalism and conflict: Peace creation and peace diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 141-159.
    14. Mozammel Huq & Michael Tribe, 2004. "Economic development in a changing globalized economy," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(7), pages 911-923.
    15. Aaronson Susan Ariel & Abouharb M. Rodwan & Daniel Wang K., 2015. "The Liberal Illusion Is Not a Complete Delusion: The WTO Helps Member States Keep the Peace Only When It Increases Trade," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 455-484, December.
    16. Adrian Wood, 2004. "Making globalization work for the poor: the 2000 White Paper reconsidered," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(7), pages 933-937.
    17. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & Jon C. Pevehouse, 2008. "Democracy, Veto Players and the Depth of Regional Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 67-96, January.
    18. Vatcharin Sirimaneetham, 2006. "What drives liberal policies in developing countries?," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 06/587, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    19. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889.
    20. Dawood MAMOON, 2018. "Globalization, political orientation and wage inequality: From Donald Trump’s election to Angela Merkal’s re-election," Turkish Economic Review, KSP Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 12-21, March.

    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:wly:syseng:v:8:y:2005:i:3:p:211-233. 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://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    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.