IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/wpaper/wp97-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Chasing Phantoms: The Political Economy of USTR

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Noland

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

During the last decade the US government has taken numerous bilateral actions intended to reduce other countries' border or internal regulations that were said to restrict US exports, investments, and property rights. Judging from the data for 1994-1993, USTR paid attention to countries with large bilateral trade surpluses with the US, and to those with larger and faster-growing economies, and not particularly to those with higher barriers. Washington actually took greater action, on the other hand, towards those whose identifiable barriers were high. These patterns of behavior do not appear to vary by presidential administration. Japan received more bilateral pressure than its economic characteristics would appear to warrant, but there is little evidence that this pressure had its desired effects. The US achieved greater change in countries whose economies were more dependent on the US market and on issues covered by international rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Noland, 1997. "Chasing Phantoms: The Political Economy of USTR," Working Paper Series WP97-1, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:iie:wpaper:wp97-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/working-papers/chasing-phantoms-political-economy-ustr
    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    8. Wickes, Ron, 2021. "Trade deficits and trade conflict: The United States and Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:iie:wpaper:wp97-1. 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: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.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.