The International Trade Regime and the Quest for Free Digital Trade

Abstract

The global economy is experiencing the digitalization of production, exchange, and consumption of goods and services. The internet and cross-border data flows are becoming important channels of trade as more products are traded through the web or integrate features that rely on digital connectivity. Reflecting the autonomy states have to enact such policies, national variations in internet governance have expanded over the previous decade, with states increasingly looking to use internet and data policies for economic and trade objectives. These dynamics are having important implications on the international trade regime through challenging existing trade rules and creating demands for new rules. This has resulted in growing debates in the trade arena around “digital trade,” as a number of states, led by the United States, push for rules as a way to discipline national internet policies and support trade in digital goods and services. This paper examines the political economy of this campaign. We argue that the objectives of this campaign go beyond updating rules to better fit the “Internet age” into achieving further liberalization of trade in goods and services. We highlight the technological contingency of existing international rules and show how technological shifts have been a driver of competitive regime creation and forum shifting contributing to processes of fragmentation of the international trade regime.

Digital Trade Rules in Preferential Trade Agreements: Is There a WTO Impact?

“…The authors argue that China, the EU and the US have established three distinct data realms with different approaches to data governance. These patterns of divergence are also identified by other recent studies including contributions by Azmeh et al (2019), Ferencz and Gonzales (2019), Gao (2018), and Sen (2018).…”

Big tech, knowledge predation and the implications for development

“…In other countries, the room for and efficiency of antitrust action against GAFAM looks narrow. So far, China has been successful in reducing US tech giants' dominance through blocking their access to domestic markets and data while simultaneously creating its own intellectual monopolies (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent and Huawei) (Azmeh, Foster, and Echavarri 2020;UNCTAD 2019). The European Union has engaged in antitrust sanctions, but it is still an open question how far it can go in this direction, given that the US could punish European governments trying to limit GAFAM's freedom of action.…”

Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business

“…In some sectors marked by globalization of production and the presence of GVCs, TRIPS has been almost redundant and supplanted by standards and cooperative agreements over essential patents as the mode of governance of innovation and appropriability. The emergence of digital commerce created new challenges and forms of conflict that TRIPS was unable to address (Azmeh, Foster, & Echavarri, 2020 ; Haggart, 2014 ). International labour mobility has also brought a slew of new issues to consider such as trade secrets and espionage activity.…”