This paper shows that electoral incentives affect the occurrence of trade disputes. Focusing on WTO disputes filed by the United States during the 1995-2012 period, we show that U.S.presidents are more likely to initiate a dispute in the year preceding their re-election date.Moreover, disputes filed by the U.S. tend to target industries that are important to swing states in the presidential election. To explain these regularities, we develop a theoretical model in which an incumbent can file a trade dispute to appeal to voters motivated by reciprocity. The incumbent's ability to initiate a dispute during the re-election campaign provides an advantage over the challenger, who cannot commit to file the dispute if elected. If voters' ideological preferences are not too strong in favor of either candidate, the incumbent will file a trade dispute to increase his re-election chances. To explain these regularities, we develop a theoretical model in which an incumbent can file a trade dispute to appeal to voters motivated by reciprocity. The incumbent's ability to initiate a dispute during the re-election campaign provides an advantage over the challenger, who cannot commit to file the dispute if elected. If voters' ideological preferences are not too strong in favor of either candidate, the incumbent will file a trade dispute to increase his re-election chances.JEL classifications: F13, D72, D78, D63.
During the last decades, the United States has applied increasingly high trade protection against China. We combine detailed information on US antidumping (AD) duties-the most widely used trade barrier -with US input-output data to study the effects of trade protection along supply chains. To deal with endogeneity concerns, we propose a new instrument for AD protection, which combines exogenous variation in the political importance of industries with their historical experience in AD proceedings. We find that tariffs have large negative effects on downstream industries, decreasing employment, wages, sales, and investment. Our baseline estimates for 1988-2016 indicate that, due to AD protection against China, around 1.8 million US jobs were lost in downstream industries, with no significant job gains in protected sectors. When we extend the analysis to measures introduced under President Trump, we find that around 500,000 jobs were lost during the first two years of his term. We also provide evidence of the mechanisms behind the negative effects of protection along supply chains: AD duties decrease imports and raise production costs for downstream industries.
The recent backlash against free trade is partially motivated by the decline in manufacturing employment due to rising import competition from China. Previous studies about the "China syndrome" neglect the role of trade policy. This is surprising, given that politicians in highincome countries have extensively used antidumping (AD) measures to protect their economies from rising Chinese imports. In this paper, I estimate the causal effect of trade protection on imports and employment, by constructing a new instrument for AD measures based on industries' importance in swing states and experience in filing AD petitions. I show that AD duties have reduced import competition, decreasing the annual growth rate of US imports from China by 0.40 percentage points on average. They have also helped contain the China syndrome, by increasing the annual growth rate of employment in protected industries by 0.07 percentage points. These results show that protectionist instruments allowed under GATT/WTO rules can be used to attenuate the effects of import competition on employment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.