Bilateral Negotiations and Multilateral Trade: The Case of Taiwan-U.S. Trade Talks

Tain-Jy Chen, Meng-Chun Liu
{"title":"Bilateral Negotiations and Multilateral Trade: The Case of Taiwan-U.S. Trade Talks","authors":"Tain-Jy Chen, Meng-Chun Liu","doi":"10.3386/W5324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reviews the history of bilateral trade negotiations between Taiwan and the U.S. The question posed at the outset is: does bilateralism enhance or jeopardize multilateralism? The U.S.-Taiwan experience seems to suggest a grossly negative answer. Bilateral negotiations for market opening with the threat of unilateral trade sanctions (such as Section 301 action) tend to encourage trade preferences and U.S. negotiators are inclined to accept such preferential arrangements in areas where U.S. domestic interests are homogeneous and concentrated. Even in the case of tariff negotiations where any tariff concessions made by Taiwan are extended to other trading partners on an MFN basis, bilateralism does not necessarily enhance multilateral principles. The scope of tariff concessions made by Taiwan shows a strong bias in favor of the sectors in which the U.S. has a comparative advantage in Taiwan's market and the sectors in which U.S. domestic industries exhibit monopoly power. Meanwhile, U.S. commitments to GATT strengthen its position in bilateral negotiations and help persuade Taiwan, which is not a member of GATT, to make similar concessions.","PeriodicalId":264966,"journal":{"name":"Two-Party Negotiations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Two-Party Negotiations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3386/W5324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reviews the history of bilateral trade negotiations between Taiwan and the U.S. The question posed at the outset is: does bilateralism enhance or jeopardize multilateralism? The U.S.-Taiwan experience seems to suggest a grossly negative answer. Bilateral negotiations for market opening with the threat of unilateral trade sanctions (such as Section 301 action) tend to encourage trade preferences and U.S. negotiators are inclined to accept such preferential arrangements in areas where U.S. domestic interests are homogeneous and concentrated. Even in the case of tariff negotiations where any tariff concessions made by Taiwan are extended to other trading partners on an MFN basis, bilateralism does not necessarily enhance multilateral principles. The scope of tariff concessions made by Taiwan shows a strong bias in favor of the sectors in which the U.S. has a comparative advantage in Taiwan's market and the sectors in which U.S. domestic industries exhibit monopoly power. Meanwhile, U.S. commitments to GATT strengthen its position in bilateral negotiations and help persuade Taiwan, which is not a member of GATT, to make similar concessions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
双边谈判与多边贸易:以台美贸易为例。贸易谈判
本文回顾了台美双边贸易谈判的历史,一开始提出的问题是:双边主义是促进还是危害多边主义?美国和台湾的经验似乎给出了一个非常消极的答案。以单边贸易制裁(如301条款行动)为威胁的双边市场开放谈判倾向于鼓励贸易优惠,美国谈判代表倾向于在美国国内利益同质和集中的领域接受这种优惠安排。即使在关税谈判中,台湾做出的任何关税减让都以最惠国待遇的基础上延伸到其他贸易伙伴,双边主义也不一定会加强多边原则。台湾关税减让的范围显示出对美国在台湾市场上具有比较优势的部门和美国国内产业表现出垄断力量的部门的强烈偏袒。与此同时,美国对关贸总协定的承诺加强了其在双边谈判中的地位,并有助于说服不是关贸总协定成员的台湾做出类似的让步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Getting to NO: Theory and Evidence for Instrumental Negotiations Rethinking the Fairness Hypothesis: Procedural Justice in Simple Bargaining Games Developing Evidence-Based Expertise in Emotion Management: Strategically Displaying and Responding to Emotions in Negotiations Bargaining and Specialization in Marriage Experimental Tests for Gender Effects in a Principal-Agent Game
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1