The China-OECD trade divide: building bridges.
Today's largest trade frictions stem from differences between China and the OECD regarding the appropriate role of government. There are two types of differences. The first are legitimate attitudinal differences towards industrial policy (the use of subsidies), competition policy (the use of forced...
| Publicado en: | China Economic Journal Vol. 12; no. 2; pp. 195 - 208 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Jun2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=137164826&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 137164826 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 17538963 5EVV jtl: China Economic Journal issn: 17538963 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2019 vid: 12 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 137164826 10.1080/17538963.2019.1603644 ppf: 195 ppct: 13 formats: tig: atl: The China-OECD trade divide: building bridges. aug: au: Trefler, Daniel affil: Rotman School of Management and Department of Economics, University of Toronto Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR) National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) su: China Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development World Trade Organization Intellectual property Political science Class differences Building trades Industrial policy sug: subj: Intellectual property Political science Class differences China Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development World Trade Organization Administration of General Economic Programs International and other extra-territorial public administration International Affairs Building trades Industrial policy ab: Today's largest trade frictions stem from differences between China and the OECD regarding the appropriate role of government. There are two types of differences. The first are legitimate attitudinal differences towards industrial policy (the use of subsidies), competition policy (the use of forced industry consolidation), and innovation policy (weak protections of intellectual property). China and the OECD will have to reach an accommodation on these differences if the end game is a rules-based trading system. Accommodation is possible, but unfortunately, both the US and China are adopting bullying tactics that diminish the effectiveness of the WTO and threaten the current rules-based system. The second class of differences is political and reflects China's intentional lack of policy transparency and its generosity towards favoured firms. These differences will never be WTO compliant and China must either reform or give up its access to OECD markets. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|