Cargando…

Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?

We explore the impact of the introduction and design of labor clauses (LCs) in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) on bilateral trade flows over the period 1990–2014. While it is not a priori clear if the inclusion of LCs in PTAs will decrease or increase bilateral trade, we expect the direction of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carrère, Céline, Olarreaga, Marcelo, Raess, Damian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9212734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35757572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11558-021-09423-3
_version_ 1784730672734142464
author Carrère, Céline
Olarreaga, Marcelo
Raess, Damian
author_facet Carrère, Céline
Olarreaga, Marcelo
Raess, Damian
author_sort Carrère, Céline
collection PubMed
description We explore the impact of the introduction and design of labor clauses (LCs) in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) on bilateral trade flows over the period 1990–2014. While it is not a priori clear if the inclusion of LCs in PTAs will decrease or increase bilateral trade, we expect the direction of trade to matter, that is, we expect to observe the (negative or positive) impact of LCs in the South-North trade configuration. We also expect, in that configuration, stronger LCs to yield stronger (negative or positive) effects on bilateral trade flows. Using a novel dataset on the content of labor provisions in PTAs, we find in line with our first expectation that while the introduction of LCs has on average no impact on bilateral trade flows, it increases exports of low and middle-income countries with weaker labor standards in North–South trade agreements. Consistent with our second expectation, this positive impact is mostly driven by LCs with institutionalized cooperation provisions. In contrast, LCs with strong enforcement mechanisms do not have a statistically significant impact on exports of developing countries in North–South PTAs. The results are inconsistent with the ideas that LCs are set for protectionist reasons or have protectionist effects, casting doubt on the logic for the reluctance of many developing countries to include LCs in their trade agreements. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material (Online Appendix with annexes 1-4) available at 10.1007/s11558-021-09423-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9212734
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92127342022-06-22 Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism? Carrère, Céline Olarreaga, Marcelo Raess, Damian Rev Int Organ Article We explore the impact of the introduction and design of labor clauses (LCs) in preferential trade agreements (PTAs) on bilateral trade flows over the period 1990–2014. While it is not a priori clear if the inclusion of LCs in PTAs will decrease or increase bilateral trade, we expect the direction of trade to matter, that is, we expect to observe the (negative or positive) impact of LCs in the South-North trade configuration. We also expect, in that configuration, stronger LCs to yield stronger (negative or positive) effects on bilateral trade flows. Using a novel dataset on the content of labor provisions in PTAs, we find in line with our first expectation that while the introduction of LCs has on average no impact on bilateral trade flows, it increases exports of low and middle-income countries with weaker labor standards in North–South trade agreements. Consistent with our second expectation, this positive impact is mostly driven by LCs with institutionalized cooperation provisions. In contrast, LCs with strong enforcement mechanisms do not have a statistically significant impact on exports of developing countries in North–South PTAs. The results are inconsistent with the ideas that LCs are set for protectionist reasons or have protectionist effects, casting doubt on the logic for the reluctance of many developing countries to include LCs in their trade agreements. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material (Online Appendix with annexes 1-4) available at 10.1007/s11558-021-09423-3. Springer US 2021-05-29 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9212734/ /pubmed/35757572 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11558-021-09423-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Carrère, Céline
Olarreaga, Marcelo
Raess, Damian
Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title_full Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title_fullStr Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title_full_unstemmed Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title_short Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?
title_sort labor clauses in trade agreements: hidden protectionism?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9212734/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35757572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11558-021-09423-3
work_keys_str_mv AT carrereceline laborclausesintradeagreementshiddenprotectionism
AT olarreagamarcelo laborclausesintradeagreementshiddenprotectionism
AT raessdamian laborclausesintradeagreementshiddenprotectionism