一种经济理念的进行曲?保护主义不是反措施?循环(了)

A. Rose
{"title":"一种经济理念的进行曲?保护主义不是反措施?循环(了)","authors":"A. Rose","doi":"10.1111/1468-0327.12017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conventional wisdom holds that protectionism is counter‐cyclic; tariffs, quotas and the like grow during recessions. While that may have been a valid description of the data before the First World War, it is now inaccurate. Since the Second World War, protectionism has not been counter‐cyclic; tariffs and non‐tariff barriers simply do not rise systematically during downturns. I document this new stylised fact with a panel of data covering over 180 countries and 40 years, using over a dozen measures of protectionism and six of business cycles. I test and reject a number of potential reasons why protectionism is no longer counter‐cyclic. A ‘diagnosis of exclusion’ leads me to believe that modern economics may well be responsible for the decline in protectionism's cyclic behaviour; economists are more united in their disdain for protectionism than virtually any other concept. This in turn leaves one optimistic that the level of protectionism will continue to decline along with its cyclicality. — Andrew K. Rose","PeriodicalId":236508,"journal":{"name":"Wiley-Blackwell: Economic Policy","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The March of an Economic Idea? Protectionism Isn't Counter�?Cyclic (Anymore)\",\"authors\":\"A. Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-0327.12017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Conventional wisdom holds that protectionism is counter‐cyclic; tariffs, quotas and the like grow during recessions. While that may have been a valid description of the data before the First World War, it is now inaccurate. Since the Second World War, protectionism has not been counter‐cyclic; tariffs and non‐tariff barriers simply do not rise systematically during downturns. I document this new stylised fact with a panel of data covering over 180 countries and 40 years, using over a dozen measures of protectionism and six of business cycles. I test and reject a number of potential reasons why protectionism is no longer counter‐cyclic. A ‘diagnosis of exclusion’ leads me to believe that modern economics may well be responsible for the decline in protectionism's cyclic behaviour; economists are more united in their disdain for protectionism than virtually any other concept. This in turn leaves one optimistic that the level of protectionism will continue to decline along with its cyclicality. — Andrew K. Rose\",\"PeriodicalId\":236508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wiley-Blackwell: Economic Policy\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wiley-Blackwell: Economic Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0327.12017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley-Blackwell: Economic Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0327.12017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

传统观点认为,保护主义是逆周期的;在经济衰退期间,关税、配额等措施会增加。虽然这可能是对第一次世界大战前数据的有效描述,但现在却不准确了。自第二次世界大战以来,保护主义并不是逆循环的;在经济衰退期间,关税和非关税壁垒根本不会系统性地上升。我用一组涵盖180多个国家和40年的数据来记录这一新的事实,使用了十多种保护主义措施和六个商业周期。我测试并拒绝了保护主义不再是逆循环的一些潜在原因。“排斥性诊断”让我相信,现代经济学很可能是保护主义周期性行为减少的原因;经济学家在对保护主义的蔑视上比其他任何概念都要一致。这反过来又让人乐观地认为,保护主义水平将随着其周期性而继续下降。——安德鲁·罗斯
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The March of an Economic Idea? Protectionism Isn't Counter�?Cyclic (Anymore)
Conventional wisdom holds that protectionism is counter‐cyclic; tariffs, quotas and the like grow during recessions. While that may have been a valid description of the data before the First World War, it is now inaccurate. Since the Second World War, protectionism has not been counter‐cyclic; tariffs and non‐tariff barriers simply do not rise systematically during downturns. I document this new stylised fact with a panel of data covering over 180 countries and 40 years, using over a dozen measures of protectionism and six of business cycles. I test and reject a number of potential reasons why protectionism is no longer counter‐cyclic. A ‘diagnosis of exclusion’ leads me to believe that modern economics may well be responsible for the decline in protectionism's cyclic behaviour; economists are more united in their disdain for protectionism than virtually any other concept. This in turn leaves one optimistic that the level of protectionism will continue to decline along with its cyclicality. — Andrew K. Rose
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Unemployment at Risk: The Policy Determinants of Labour Market Exposure to Economic Shocks School and Family Effects on Educational Outcomes Across Countries Evaluating the Cost of Government Credit Support: The OECD Context Public Policy and Resource Allocation: Evidence from Firms in OECD Countries Defying Gravity: Can Japanese Sovereign Debt Continue to Increase Without a Crisis?
×
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