Domestic political implications of global value chains: Explaining EU responses to litigation at the World Trade Organization

Yildirim, Aydin

doi:10.1057/s41295-016-0085-3

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A growing number of studies have focused on the implications of GVCs for EU trade policy showing that the latter has become more responsive to the preferences, patterns of political mobilization, and influence of import-dependent firms, that is firms and sectors that rely on income generated from the import of intermediate products for their production process. These contributions show that import-dependent firms have increased the weight of the domestic coalition favoring trade liberalization in the EU (Eckhardt, 2015;Eckhardt and Poletti, 2016;Yildirim, 2016;Smith, 2018;Dür et al, 2020).…”

Section: Gvcs and The Politics Of Sustainable Development In Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting sustainable development through trade? EU trade agreements and global value chains

Poletti

Sicurelli

Yildirim

2020

Riv. ital. sci. polit.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development provisions have become an integral part of the European Union's (EU's) ‘new generation’ trade agreements. Yet, a growing number of empirical works show that their design varies significantly, even in the trade agreements signed with countries at similar (low) levels of development. We contend that this variation can be accounted for by discussing how the growing integration of the EU economy with specific developing countries across global value chains (GVCs) affects the domestic politics of regulatory export in the EU. European firms that operate within GVCs rely on imports of inputs produced in low-labor cost countries. These firms tend to oppose the export of those regulatory burdens that generate an increase in their imports' variable costs. The political mobilization of these actors weakens domestic coalitions supporting regulatory export strategies, which explains why the EU adopts a more lenient approach over the inclusion of sustainable development provisions in Preferential Trade Agreement negotiations with some developing countries.

show abstract

Section: Gvcs and The Politics Of Sustainable Development In Trade Agreementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting sustainable development through trade? EU trade agreements and global value chains

Poletti

Sicurelli

Yildirim

2020

Riv. ital. sci. polit.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, specifically for the EU, a growing number of studies shows that import-dependent firms have become crucial actors in the politics of EU trade policy. They 1) oppose the imposition of antidumping measures (Eckhardt 2015; De Bièvre and Eckhardt 2011); 2) support trade liberalization through preferential trade agreements (PTAs) (Eckhardt and Poletti 2016); and 3) advocate swift compliance in WTO disputes (Yildirim 2016). Overall, the increasing political role of importdependent firms should strengthen the political weight and influence of pro-trade domestic coalitions.…”

Section: The Gvc Perspective On Eu Trade Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Global value chains, the anti-globalization backlash, and EU trade policy: a research agenda

Dür

Eckhardt

Poletti

2019

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two recent developments have the potential to fundamentally alter the conventional view of EU trade policy-making: the emergence of global value chains (GVCs) and the recent backlash against globalization. In this paper we summarize the conventional wisdom after which we delineate the main expectations derived from the GVC and the globalization-backlash perspectives. In so doing, we focus on the EU's trade and non-trade preferences, and the EU's ability to achieve its preferences in international trade negotiations. We then discuss the research agenda that would allow testing the expectations derived from these different perspectives. A key point that emerges from this discussion is that the conventional perspective, the GVC perspective, and the globalization-backlash perspective may all be needed to fully understand EU trade policy. The challenge is to know under which conditions which of these perspectives best explains the process and outcomes of EU trade policy-making.

show abstract

“…This implies that such exporters are also likely to support compliance at the WTO due to a potential threat of retaliation via market closures (Bown, 2004). Yet, I primarily focus on the role of import-dependent firms whose trade liberalizing preferences are likely to be in line with exporters who also wish to lower trade barriers – creating a strong domestic coalition for trade liberalization (Eckhardt and Poletti, 2016; Yildirim, 2016).…”

Section: A Theory Of Compliancementioning

confidence: 99%

Firms’ Integration into Value Chains and Compliance with Adverse WTO Panel Rulings

Yildirim

2017

World Trade Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to account for the variation in the time it takes for WTO Members to bring compliance following adverse panel rulings. It seeks to answer the question: under what conditions do defendants swiftly implement adverse rulings of WTO panels? I demonstrate that defendants are more likely to comply without delay when the targeted measures involve firms that are integrated into regional and global value chains. When a dispute touches upon the interests of these firms and targets import-restricting measures, they are triggered to mobilize and press for compliance because they rely on foreign imports. In effect, the mobilization of these firms changes the domestic political conditions in favor of timely implementation. I show the plausibility of my argument in a comparative design with four case studies in which the US and Canada acted as defendants in WTO disputes. I control for a number of political factors and also consider legal sources of variation – i.e. the complexity of the form of implementation – that may impact WTO Members’ record of compliance.

show abstract

Domestic political implications of global value chains: Explaining EU responses to litigation at the World Trade Organization

Cited by 14 publications

References 39 publications

Promoting sustainable development through trade? EU trade agreements and global value chains

Promoting sustainable development through trade? EU trade agreements and global value chains

Global value chains, the anti-globalization backlash, and EU trade policy: a research agenda

Firms’ Integration into Value Chains and Compliance with Adverse WTO Panel Rulings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About