The multi-level state: Canada in the semi-periphery of both continentalism and globalization

Clarkson, Stephen

doi:10.1080/09692290126408

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Canada, scholars such as Stephen Clarkson (2001) have argued that through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Canada has lost its ability to autonomously make policy. Clarkson's analysis, however, remains largely superficial and lacking in empirical examples.…”

Section: International Financementioning

confidence: 99%

Middle-Sized Powers in Global Finance

Roberge¹

2006

Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: International Financementioning

confidence: 99%

Middle-Sized Powers in Global Finance

Roberge¹

2006

Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We pay special attention to the role of Quebec which, in the realm of border security, has furthered Canadian interests vis-à-vis the United States, due to its well-organized political network in neighbouring states, as well as in Washington DC. Drawing on the insight of Clarkson (2001), as well as Gattinger and Hale (2010), that Canadian national policy making has become simultaneously internationalized and localized, we seek to answer the following questions. Is Canada disadvantaged when dealing with the United States on this sensitive topic?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharing the Burden of the Border: Layered Security Co-operation and the Canada–US Frontier

Hlatky

Trisko

2012

Can J Pol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Effectively managing the Canada–US border has emerged as a major security challenge post-9/11. Burden-sharing theories suggest that the United States would take the lead on border security due to its hegemonic role in ensuring North American security, while smaller nations such as Canada enjoy a free ride. We refute the free-rider hypothesis and propose an approach which accounts for the differentiated concerns held by contiguous states. By dedicating sizeable resources to the issue of border security and by appealing to advantageous negotiation strategies, Ottawa has leveraged its position as a secondary state vis-à-vis the United States. Efforts employed by the province of Quebec have bolstered Canada's relative influence in this issue area. We argue that Quebec and Ottawa perceived and acted on complementary interests which empowered the Canadian government to respond more forcefully to US-driven border security measures after 9/11. We conclude with alternative models to border security management, as well the practical implications of our argument.Résumé.Un des défis majeurs depuis le 11 septembre 2001 concerne la gestion de la frontière entre le Canada et les États-Unis. Les théories sur le partage du fardeau supposent que les États-Unis sont l'acteur dominant dans l'élaboration des politiques frontalières, assurant la sécurité du continent nord-américain. En contrepartie, les états secondaires, comme le Canada, se voient souvent attribuer le rôle du passager clandestin dans ces interactions. Cet article porte sur le partage du fardeau entre le Canada et les États-Unis en ce qui a trait à la sécurité frontalière. Nous réfutons l'hypothèse du passager clandestin en proposant une approche qui prend compte des préoccupations distinctes des deux états voisins. En investissant d'importantes ressources pour la gestion de la frontière et en appliquant des stratégies de négociations avantageuses, Ottawa a su surmonter son statut de puissance moyenne face aux États-Unis. Le Québec a contribué au renforcement de la position canadienne en agissant de concert avec Ottawa, puisque les deux paliers poursuivaient des intérêts complémentaires. Le résultat de cette coopération est une riposte cohérente et soutenue démontrée par le gouvernement canadien face aux mesures de sécurité initiées par les États-Unis après le 11 septembre. Enfin, nous discutons également des implications pratiques de notre argument en comparant les différents modèles dans la litérature portant sur la gestion de la sécurité frontalière.

show abstract

“…The WTO panel found that the primary discipline of GATT Article XVII:1 governing STEs was non-discrimination, and operating on the basis of 'commercial' considerations, as commerce was defined in the American argument, was not an independent obligation (Hoekman and Trachtman, 2007). Canadian structural adjustment is usually explained by a number of factors, the most important being American political pressure and international trade agreements (Clarkson, 2001). In this case, the WTO upheld the legality of Canada's state trading enterprise, suggesting that trade discipline may play less of a role in Canada's structural adjustment process than other factors such as proximity to American markets and other competitive pressures that result from increased exposure to global markets.…”

Section: Since Coming To Power In 2006 the Federal Conservatives Ledmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Does the Future Hold for the Canadian Wheat Board? Trade Friction, Dispute Settlement and State Support for Agriculture in North America

Froese

2008

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the substance of the WTO panel decision for Canada-Wheat as it relates to the ongoing debate about the future of the Canadian Wheat Board. In this case, the WTO upheld the legality of Canada's marketing board for wheat and barley. The decision suggests that trade discipline may play less of a role in Canada's ongoing adjustment processes than other factors such as proximity to American markets and other competitive pressures that result from exposure to global markets. Furthermore, in aggregate terms, Canada and the US have been adjusting levels of support downwards over the past decade. What then is the future of the CWB? Dismantling the CWB may fit Canada's long-term industrial development pattern. However, in the immediate future the federal government must carefully consider the implications of removing programs that provide security for domestic producers -especially in light of aggressively protectionist sentiment in the American agriculture sector.

show abstract

The multi-level state: Canada in the semi-periphery of both continentalism and globalization

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Middle-Sized Powers in Global Finance

Middle-Sized Powers in Global Finance

Sharing the Burden of the Border: Layered Security Co-operation and the Canada–US Frontier

What Does the Future Hold for the Canadian Wheat Board? Trade Friction, Dispute Settlement and State Support for Agriculture in North America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About