Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Intereconomics ; 57(6):345-351, 2022.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-2174425

ABSTRACT

From the perspective of international economic governance, other than casting aspersions on the judgement of those that negotiated previous multilateral trade accords and the accession of China to the World Trade Organization, the deglobalisation narrative is silent on how to reform that organisation — or what to salvage from existing global trade rules.

2.
World Econ ; 45(2): 342-364, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1816661

ABSTRACT

This paper presents new high-frequency data on trade policy changes targeting medical and food products since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, documenting how countries used trade policy instruments in response to the health crisis on a week-by-week basis. The data set reveals a rapid increase in trade policy activism in February and March 2020 in tandem with the rise in COVID-19 cases but also uncovers extensive heterogeneity across countries in both their use of trade policy and the types of measures used. Some countries acted to restrict exports and facilitate imports, others targeted only one of these margins, and many did not use trade policy at all. The observed heterogeneity suggests numerous research questions on the drivers of trade policy responses to COVID-19, on the effects of these measures on trade and prices of critical products, and on the role of trade agreements in influencing the use of trade policy.

3.
Journal of World Trade ; 55(3):397, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1227425

ABSTRACT

On 30 January 2021 an export authorization regime for COVID-19 vaccines came into effect for shipments from the European Union. While some contend covert export curbs on COVID- 19 vaccines predated this move, the EU's export authorization regime – which includes provision to prohibit export of vaccine – was the first overt control regime introduced on such vaccines since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. To some observers this step by the European Union confirmed fears that Vaccine Nationalism would disrupt the equitable and efficient distribution of vaccines necessary. While such legitimate global public health concerns provide important context, the purpose of this article is to examine in detail the contents of the European Commission's implementing regulation for this export authorization regime. Seven grounds are found for concern by the European Union's trading partners. Having established such cause for concern, the article then lays out five ways in which those trading partners might react, bearing in mind that different trading partners face different circumstances and may respond in different ways. The potential for direct retaliation within the COVID-19 vaccine supply chain is explored as well as cross-retaliation for trade in essential goods and against the affiliates of European Union affiliates located abroad.

4.
Journal of International Business Policy ; 3(4):408-429, 2020.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1019980

ABSTRACT

If taken at their word, senior policymakers in the major economic powers have drawn adverse conclusions concerning the performance of cross-border supply chains during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. That such supply chains often implicate China, the origin of the pandemic, has also led to claims that trading partners have become too dependent on Chinese supplies. This in turn has led to policy interventions designed to reconfigure supply chains, which if adopted broadly could revise the terms upon which international business operates. A critical evaluation of this policymaker assessment is presented, based on near-time monitoring of medical and food trade disruption induced by government policy, on fine-grained trade data on the pre-pandemic international sourcing patterns of medical goods and medicines by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States, on statements from U.S. government health experts before and during the pandemic on the frequency and sources of medicine shortages, and on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s latest evidence on the causes of medicine shortages in 2020. Such evidence vitiates the adverse conclusions mentioned above, but raises important questions about the factors that determine policy towards international business during a time of intensifying geopolitical rivalry.

5.
Global Trade and Customs Journal ; 15(9):413-422, 2020.
Article | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-746318

ABSTRACT

In the landmark glass fibre fabrics (GFF) anti-subsidy case, the EU has recently started countervailing foreign direct investment (FDI) of Chinese companies. This is an unwise move from a policy and legal perspective and will come back to haunt EU companies in the future. The timing is also unfortunate seeing how the EU and its Member States are spending billions of Euros in subsidies to support industrial sectors in the EU supposedly affected by Covid-19.

6.
Non-conventional in English | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-17446

ABSTRACT

Abstract In our interconnected world, whenever a global crisis occurs governments must decide whether discriminating against foreign suppliers is part of the solution?or whether foreign know-how and resources can be tapped for mutual advantage. Decisions to sacrifice open borders on the altar of some other goal are typically influenced by the steps?real or perceived?taken by other governments. At such times, written and unwritten international rules are tested, with consequences that can last well after the crisis dominated headlines. The COVID-19 pandemic is no exception.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL