America’s Mega-Regional Trade Diplomacy: Comparing TPP and TTIP

Hamilton, Daniel S.

doi:10.1080/03932729.2014.877223

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The loss of strength in the multilateral arena directed the US towards mega-regional agreements like the TPP and the TTIP (Mendonça 2016). Daniel Hamilton (2014) names this "the mega-regional trade diplomacy". Both initiatives aim at preserving American preeminence in the establishment of trade rules globally (Oliveira 2016).…”

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Initially, the agreement was seen as another US endeavor to promote economic integration with the Pacific-rim countries and to solidify its clout over Asia (Hamilton 2014;Oliveira 2016). Among the members of the TPP were Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Japan, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam.…”

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The TPP in its first format was a free trade and investment agreement (Haufbauer & Cimino-Isaacs 2015). The reduction of trade tariffs applied on the border was the main American interest in the TPP negotiations (Hamilton 2014). Nevertheless, tariffs practiced among the countries in the agreement were already low, meaning the major gains for the US would come from investment and increased influence over the other partners (Hufbauer & Cimino-Isaacs 2015).…”

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These agreements include new trade issues, but its provisions are still less ambitious than the TPP's (Hamilton 2014).…”

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

hegemon’s outside option: mega-regional trade agreements and United States trade policy

Martins¹

2019

Br. Jor. Int. Rel.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States is facing growing challenges to the advancement of its interests in the World Trade Organization. The assertiveness of emerging countries in advancing their interests in the Doha Round made the achievement of a deal almost impossible. Slow progress is being made (the Trade Facilitation Agreement, for example), but no broad and significant trade deal has been reached so far. There are ongoing suggestions that the Doha round should be abandoned for good. The TPP and TTIP represented two shots the United States has taken to advance its trade interests outside the scope of the WTO, escaping possible challenges imposed by emerging countries. The irony behind this is that the trade regime in force was created by the United States at the height of its hegemony. The questions driving this paper are: Is this option for trade agreements related to American hegemonic decline? And to what extent does this option weaken the weaken the multilateral trade regime embodied in the WTO? Thereis a brief discussion about the future of this strategy under Trump's presidency, who has a different stance regarding regional trade agreements.

show abstract

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These agreements include new trade issues, but its provisions are still less ambitious than the TPP's (Hamilton 2014).…”

Section: New Strategy: Mega-regional Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

hegemon’s outside option: mega-regional trade agreements and United States trade policy

Martins¹

2019

Br. Jor. Int. Rel.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Hamilton (2014), the TTIP and the TPP negotiations can provide the US with stronger leadership qualities vis-à-vis the emerging market economies. However, these agreements can bring about uncertainties and concerns for the third countries, as it is not clear whether these agreements will result in 'trade creation' or 'trade diversion'.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Potential Effects of TPP, TTIP and Trump's Tariffs on China's Competitiveness in the US Market

Özçelik

2018

EconWorld

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the potential effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Trans-Atlantic Trade, Investment Partnership (TTIP) and also tariff-related measures implemented by Trump administration against China's export. It examines the sectors in which China will be affected most in terms of its competitiveness in the US market against the countries included in these agreements. It also investigates whether China has significant price advantages in certain sectors and whether these agreements and tariff measures have the potential to erode those advantages. The 'quantity' and 'value' of US imports from the countries included in these agreements are used for calculating 'quantity similarity indexes' and 'price similarity indexes' in order to compare China to its competitors. Taking into account 'product heterogeneity', this paper reveals how Chinese exports will be affected by the elimination of tariff barriers within the context of these agreements and also by the increases in tariffs on Chinese products. The paper also presents policy implications for China to create its own trade and competition measures against these possible trade actions, along with the potential effects of Chinese competition on other countries in the US market. The results indicate that China is likely to be seriously and negatively affected from these prospective agreements and tariff measures. It is also likely that China will lose its price competitiveness against its main competitors in the US market, especially in such sectors as plastics, medical appliances and optical instruments. Last but not the least, the products whose tariffs are increased by the Trump administration are selected in a rational way from the viewpoint of the US, as those products are generally the ones in which TPP and TTIP are relatively ineffective.JEL codes: F10, F13, F14

show abstract

Interactions Between Investment Chapters in Mega-Regionals and Bilateral Investment Treaties

Nowrot¹

2017

Mega-Regional Trade Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

America’s Mega-Regional Trade Diplomacy: Comparing TPP and TTIP

Cited by 20 publications

References 1 publication

hegemon’s outside option: mega-regional trade agreements and United States trade policy

hegemon’s outside option: mega-regional trade agreements and United States trade policy

The Potential Effects of TPP, TTIP and Trump's Tariffs on China's Competitiveness in the US Market

Interactions Between Investment Chapters in Mega-Regionals and Bilateral Investment Treaties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About