Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

No let up in the pressure of protectionism 

Reading Time: 2 mins

In Brief

The third report of the Global Trade Alert (GTA)contains five analyses. Firstly, the latest assessment of protectionist dynamics. Secondly, a focus on the Asia-Pacific region with an assessment of who is imposing what forms of protectionism in the region and which nations are getting hurt by crisis-era protectionism. Thirdly, an analysis showing the differential impact of crisis-era beggar-thy-neighbour policies on the exports of the leading sectors of the Japanese economy. Fourthly, a comparison between the products and trading partners targeted by anti-dumping investigations before and during the crisis. Finally, accounts of the impact of the crisis on the trade policy priorities of China, India, and Russia.

The central finding of the report is that while many economies may have turned the corner in the second half of the year, protectionist pressures have not relented.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

If anything, recent evidence suggests that the protectionist dynamics were worst in the first three quarters of 2009 than the GTA reported in September 2009. For sure, protectionism hasn’t yet reached the scale of the 1930s, but water doesn’t have to boil to scald.

Concerning resort to protectionism, the main findings are as follows. First, since the first G20 crisis-related summit in November 2008, the governments of the world have together implemented 297 beggar-thy-neighbour policy measures; that is, more than one for every working day of the year.

Second, since the GTA’s last report was published in September 2009, the number of beggar-thy-neighbour measures discovered (105) was more than eight times the number of benign or liberalising measures (12).

Third, when examining quarterly changes in protectionism, experience has shown that many beggar-thy-neighbour acts only come to light with delay. Previously it was estimated, in the first half of 2009, that approximately 70 measures per quarter likely harmed foreign interests. This estimate is now revised upwards by 20-25 per cent; conservatively estimated, governments imposed 85 protectionist measures per quarter during the first half of 2009.

Fourth, during the past three months the number of state measures announced which if implemented would likely harm foreign commercial interests has risen from 134 to 188. The protectionism in the pipeline keeps growing–and could limit the contribution of exports to economic recovery.

Fifth, since the last G20 Report, every one of the top 10 most targeted countries has been hit a minimum of 20 more beggar-thy-neighbour state measures. China has been hit by 47 more measures (the most), followed by the USA (32) and Germany (21). Many nations retain a strong interest in discouraging foreign protectionism, even as economic recovery takes told.

Finally, on the GTA’s four indicators of harm done by a nation’s commercial policies, the Russian Federation is always in the top 5 worst offending nations. Meanwhile, China and Indonesia are always in the top 10 offenders. If the measures taken by each EU member state were aggregated, then the European Union would always appear in the top 10 offenders.

Simon J. Evenett is Professor of International Trade and Economic Development, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, Research Fellow, Centre for Economic Policy Research, and was the editor of the 3rd Global Trade Alert Report ‘The Unrelenting Pressure of Protectionism’.

Comments are closed.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.