复杂的“共识”能否经受住民粹主义毒药的考验?探讨英国脱欧和特朗普主义对发达国家贸易法律和政策的潜在影响

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW Law and Development Review Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.1515/ldr-2021-0048
Sean Stacy
{"title":"复杂的“共识”能否经受住民粹主义毒药的考验?探讨英国脱欧和特朗普主义对发达国家贸易法律和政策的潜在影响","authors":"Sean Stacy","doi":"10.1515/ldr-2021-0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Among wealthier, so-called “developed” nations, a consistent and shared policy orientation on trade has generally prevailed over the last three quarters of a century. This consensus has been hallmarked by the promotion of freer trade facilitated by a state-centric, rules-based legal system. While most wealthy countries appear to desire a continued fidelity to that policy orthodoxy, the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) ‘Brexit’ decision and the United States’ (US’) increasingly antagonistic stance toward World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement beg the question as to whether fissures in the consensus are forming. This paper examines the depth of the perceived consensus and the degree to which US and UK actions signify a turning point. As part of this examination, populism’s role in promoting change in the US, UK and beyond, is explored.","PeriodicalId":43146,"journal":{"name":"Law and Development Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"689 - 722"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can a Complicated “Consensus” Survive a Dose of Populist Poison? Exploring the Potential Impact of Brexit and Trumpism on the Developed Country Approach to Trade Law and Policy\",\"authors\":\"Sean Stacy\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ldr-2021-0048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Among wealthier, so-called “developed” nations, a consistent and shared policy orientation on trade has generally prevailed over the last three quarters of a century. This consensus has been hallmarked by the promotion of freer trade facilitated by a state-centric, rules-based legal system. While most wealthy countries appear to desire a continued fidelity to that policy orthodoxy, the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) ‘Brexit’ decision and the United States’ (US’) increasingly antagonistic stance toward World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement beg the question as to whether fissures in the consensus are forming. This paper examines the depth of the perceived consensus and the degree to which US and UK actions signify a turning point. As part of this examination, populism’s role in promoting change in the US, UK and beyond, is explored.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Development Review\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"689 - 722\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Development Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ldr-2021-0048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Development Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ldr-2021-0048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在过去的四分之三个世纪里,在富裕的所谓“发达”国家中,一致和共同的贸易政策取向普遍盛行。这一共识的特点是以国家为中心、以规则为基础的法律体系促进更自由的贸易。虽然大多数富裕国家似乎都希望继续忠于这一政策正统,但英国的“脱欧”决定和美国对世界贸易组织(WTO)争端解决机制日益敌对的立场,引发了共识是否正在形成裂痕的问题。本文考察了感知共识的深度,以及美国和英国的行动标志着转折点的程度。作为考察的一部分,本书探讨了民粹主义在推动美国、英国及其他国家变革中的作用。
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
Can a Complicated “Consensus” Survive a Dose of Populist Poison? Exploring the Potential Impact of Brexit and Trumpism on the Developed Country Approach to Trade Law and Policy
Abstract Among wealthier, so-called “developed” nations, a consistent and shared policy orientation on trade has generally prevailed over the last three quarters of a century. This consensus has been hallmarked by the promotion of freer trade facilitated by a state-centric, rules-based legal system. While most wealthy countries appear to desire a continued fidelity to that policy orthodoxy, the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) ‘Brexit’ decision and the United States’ (US’) increasingly antagonistic stance toward World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement beg the question as to whether fissures in the consensus are forming. This paper examines the depth of the perceived consensus and the degree to which US and UK actions signify a turning point. As part of this examination, populism’s role in promoting change in the US, UK and beyond, is explored.
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
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Law and Development Review (LDR) is a top peer-reviewed journal in the field of law and development which explores the impact of law, legal frameworks, and institutions (LFIs) on development. LDR is distinguished from other law and economics journals in that its primary focus is the development aspects of international and domestic legal orders. The journal promotes global exchanges of views on law and development issues. LDR facilitates future global negotiations concerning the economic development of developing countries and sets out future directions for law and development studies. Many of the top scholars and practitioners in the field, including Professors David Trubek, Bhupinder Chimni, Michael Trebilcock, and Mitsuo Matsushita, have edited LDR issues and published articles in LDR. The journal seeks top-quality articles on law and development issues broadly, from the developing world as well as from the developed world. The changing economic conditions in recent decades render the law and development approach applicable to economic issues in developed countries as well as developing ones, and LDR accepts manuscripts on law and economic development issues concerning both categories of countries. LDR’s editorial board includes top scholars and professionals with diverse regional and academic backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
Sustainable Development Under AfCFTA: Dimensions, Limitations and Prospects From Crisis to Control: Amidst and Postpandemic Data Protection Concerns in Singapore and Vietnam through the Lens of Techno-Solutionism and Efficient Violation of Privacy Rights Implementing Post-Pandemic Economic Parity: A Potential Restoration Through Distributive Justice Intellectual Property and Health Technological Innovations at the time of the Pandemic Ending 1990s Law and Development Ideas, Paradox of Path Dependence In Economic Planning Institutions Under Covid-19: SA’s Response
×
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