Economics & Global Affairs

19 Items

Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders talks to reporters as he arrives at at Quicken Loans Arena before the start of the second day session of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Tuesday, July 19, 2016.

(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate

Putting the Populist Revolt in Its Place

| October 6, 2016

In many Western democracies, this is a year of revolt against elites. The success of the Brexit campaign in Britain, Donald Trump’s unexpected capture of the Republican Party in the United States, and populist parties’ success in Germany and elsewhere strike many as heralding the end of an era. As Financial Times columnist Philip Stephens put it, “the present global order – the liberal rules-based system established in 1945 and expanded after the end of the Cold War – is under unprecedented strain. Globalization is in retreat.”

In fact, it may be premature to draw such broad conclusions.

Some economists attribute the current surge of populism to the “hyper-globalization” of the 1990s, with liberalization of international financial flows and the creation of the World Trade Organization – and particularly China’s WTO accession in 2001 – receiving the most attention. According to one study, Chinese imports eliminated nearly one million US manufacturing jobs from 1999 to 2011; including suppliers and related industries brings the losses to 2.4 million.

Report - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School

The Next Great Emerging Market?

| June 25, 2015

In The Next Great Emerging Market? Capitalizing on North America’s Four Interlocking Revolutions, Gen. (Ret.) David H. Petraeus and Paras D. Bhayani explain why North American market integration and  leadership in energy, manufacturing, life sciences, and information technology could drive substantial economic growth. But they warn that Washington must turn today’s policy headwinds into policy tailwinds to capitalize fully on these trends.

President Barack Obama and several foreign dignitaries participate in a Trans-Pacific Partnership meeting

Charles Dharapak

Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Affairs

Rescuing the free trade deals

| June 14, 2015

The Senate’s rejection of President Wo odrow Wilson’s commitment of the United States to the League of Nations was the greatest setback to U.S. global leadership of the last century. While not remotely as consequential, the votes in the House last week that, unless revisited, would doom the Trans-Pacific Partnership send the same kind of negative signal regarding the willingness of the United States to take responsibility for the global system at a critical time.

The repudiation of the TPP would neuter the U.S. presidency for the next 19 months. It would reinforce global concerns that the vicissitudes of domestic politics are increasingly rendering the United States a less reliable ally. Coming on top of the American failure to either stop or join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, it would signal a lack of U.S. commitment to Asia at a time when China is flexing its muscles. It would leave the grand strategy of rebalancing U.S. foreign policy toward Asia with no meaningful nonmilitary component. And it would strengthen the hands of companies overseas at the expense of U.S. firms. Ultimately, having a world in which U.S. companies systematically lose ground to foreign rivals would not work out to the advantage of American workers.

Both the House and Senate have now delivered majorities for the trade promotion authority necessary to complete the TPP. The problem is with the complementary trade assistance measures that most Republicans do not support and that Democrats are opposing in order to bring down the TPP. It is to be fervently hoped that a way through will be found to avoid a catastrophe for U.S. economic leadership. Perhaps success can be achieved if the TPP’s advocates can acknowledge that rather than being a model for future trade agreements, this debate should lead to careful reflection on the role of trade agreements in America’s international economic strategy.

Analysis & Opinions - Technology+Policy | Innovation@Work

Africa and Brazil at the Dawn of New Economic Diplomacy

| February 26, 2013

"There are many lessons that Africa can learn from Brazil. The key is that Brazil has had a long record of creating new institutions to address major national challenges. It stands out as a leader in aviation because of having created an aerospace conglomerate, EMBRAER, whose annual revenue stands at about US$5.7 billion. Brazil offers key lessons on how to make Africa's rapidly expanding aerospace industry safer and more reliable."

Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva at a 37th anniversary celebration of the Brazilian Enterprise for Agriculture and Livestock Research (EMBRAPA, in Portuguese), in Brasilia, Brazil, April 29, 2010.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - Public Service Review

Seeding Diplomacy

| September 2011

"The rising concern over global food price volatility has put agriculture at the centre of international cooperation. But unlike the 1950s, when food aid became a major tool in international food policy, modern interactions among states are being redefined by globalisation and the associated knowledge flows. The interactions are part of a field that can be loosely referred to as agricultural diplomacy."

Director-general of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization Jose Graziano da Silva looks on during a press conference at the Itamaraty palace in Brasilia, Brazil, Aug. 3, 2011.

AP Photo

Magazine Article - Comments

AgroDiplomacy: Growing Relations between Latin America and Africa

| Julio-Agosto 2011

"The rising concern over global food price volatility has put agriculture at the center of international diplomacy. But unlike the 1950s when food aid became a major tool in international relations, modern interactions among states are being defined by trade and knowledge transfer. A new field — agricultural diplomacy (AgroDiplomacy) — is emerging as countries learn more about their shared ecological experiences and agricultural trade interests. The prospects for building such relations are evident in the rise in cooperation between Africa and Latin America."

China's President Hu Jintao (C) delivers a speech at the BRICS summit in Sanya, China, Apr. 14, 2011. A statement adopted by the 5 BRICS states offered strong backing to reform the international financial order.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - The Wall Street Journal

Another Overhyped Challenge to U.S. Power

| July 20, 2011

"In political terms, China, India and Russia are competitors for power in Asia. Russia worries about China's proximity and influence in Siberia, and India is worried about Chinese encroachment into the Indian Ocean as well as their Himalayan border disputes. As a challenge to the United States, BRICS is unlikely to become a serious alliance or even a political organization of like-minded states."

Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security

The Security Curve and the Structure of International Politics: A Neorealist Synthesis

    Author:
  • Davide Fiammenghi
| Spring 2011

Realist scholars have long debated the question of how much power states need to feel secure. Offensive realists claim that states should constantly seek to increase their power. Defensive realists argue that accumulating too much power can be self-defeating. Proponents of hegemonic stability theory contend that the accumulation of capabilities in one state can exert a stabilizing effect on the system. The three schools describe different points along the power con­tinuum. When a state is weak, accumulating power increases its security. This is approximately the situation described by offensive realists. A state that con­tinues to accumulate capabilities will eventually triggers a balancing reaction that puts its security at risk. This scenario accords with defensive realist as­sumptions. Finally, when the state becomes too powerful to balance, its oppo­nents bandwagon with it, and the state’s security begins to increase again. This is the situation described by hegemonic stability theory. These three stages delineate a modified parabolic relationship between power and secu­rity. As a state moves along the power continuum, its security increases up to a point, then decreases, and finally increases again. This modified parabolic re­lationship allows scholars to synthesize previous realist theories into a single framework.