-

This seminar is part of the "Europe and the Global Economy" series.

The Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), if successful, will eliminate trade barriers between the US and the EU, both of which already have free trade agreements with many other countries, including several that are in FTAs with both (Canada, Korea, Mexico to name just a few).  Is TTIP therefore achieving true free trade with this larger group?  No. Restrictive rules of origin apply, and these can potentially interfere with trade and reduce welfare even when compared to a world without any of these FTAs.

Alan V. Deardorff is John W. Sweetland Professor of International Economics and Professor of Economics and Public Policy, University of Michigan.  With a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University, he has been on the faculty at the University of Michigan since 1970, where he has served as Chair of Economics and now Associate Dean of the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy.  His research has included both contributions to the theory of international trade and, with Robert M. Stern, development of the Michigan Model of World Production of Trade, used for analysis of multi-country, multi-sector changes in trade policy.

CISAC Conference Room

Alan Deardorff John W. Sweetland Professor of International Economics and Professor of Economics and Public Policy Speaker the University of Michigan
Seminars
-

The process of joining an IO may cause liberalization before membership. Thus studies that only evaluate compliance after membership underestimate the effects. Conditional membership may be one of the most important sources of leverage for IOs.  The rule-makers establish rules that don't go far beyond what they would otherwise do, but rule-takers often must accept a broad range of policy reforms they would not otherwise consider. The influence of accession conditions has been studied in the context of EU and NATO, where sizeable benefits and formal conditions motivate major concessions by applicants. This paper proposes to examine a much less powerful organization, the OECD. Here the qualifications for membership are ambiguous and leave open room for informal pressure for a range of economic reforms. The politics of joining organizations touch closely on concerns about status and legitimacy as well as functional demands for cooperation in complex issue areas. I will examine how OECD membership has motivated specific reforms in regulatory policies and trade in a comparison of the East European transition economies accession with that of Japan, Mexico, and Korea. Statistical analysis of patterns of when countries apply for membership will test for the role of economic and political conditions as well as the political relations among members.

Christina Davis is a professor at the Department of Politics and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs of Princeton University. Her teaching and research interests bridge international relations and comparative politics, with a focus on trade policy. Professor Davis' interests include the politics and foreign policy of Japan, East Asia, and the European Union and the study of international organizations. She is the author of Food Fights Over Free Trade: How International Institutions Promote Agricultural Trade Liberalization (Princeton University Press, 2003) and Why Adjudicate? Enforcing Trade Rules in the WTO (Princeton University Press, 2012).
 
This seminar is part of TEC's "Europe and the Global Economy" program seminar series.

CISAC Conference Room

Christina Davis Professor of Politics and International Affairs Speaker Princeton University
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Bringing together postwar German, Israeli, and Anglo-American literature, Professor Amir Eshel (German Studies and Comparative Literature) traces a shared trajectory of futurity in world literature.

For a full synopsis, please visit the publication website by clicking on the book title below.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

Effective climate mitigation requires international cooperation, and these global efforts need broad public support to be sustainable over the long run. We provide estimates of public support for different types of climate agreements in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Using data from a large-scale experimental survey, we explore how three key dimensions of global climate cooperation—costs and distribution, participation, and enforcement—affect individuals’ willingness to support these international efforts. We find that design features have significant effects on public support. Specifically, our results indicate that support is higher for global climate agreements that involve lower costs, distribute costs according to prominent fairness principles, encompass more countries, and include a small sanction if a country fails to meet its emissions reduction targets. In contrast to well-documented baseline differences in public support for climate mitigation efforts, opinion responds similarly to changes in climate policy design in all four countries. We also find that the effects of institutional design features can bring about decisive changes in the level of public support for a global climate agreement. Moreover, the results appear consistent with the view that the sensitivity of public support to design features reflects underlying norms of reciprocity and individuals’ beliefs about the potential effectiveness of specific agreements.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Authors
Paragraphs

On July 8th, 2013, the United States and the European Union started negotiations on the  Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP), which is to create a free trade area.  In this working paper, Tim Josling and Christophe Crombez study the prospects for such a transatlantic free trade area, starting with the background behind why the T-TIP is on the agenda now and what areas of trade are being negotiated.  They analyze who stands to benefit from such a trade and investment agreement, how long it might take to reach such an agreement, and what factors might influence its acceptability to legislators.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Authors
Timothy E. Josling
Christophe Crombez

The Europe Center's 2-day multidisciplinary dialogue on migration -- the subject of great and growing consequence in the contemporary world. Conference participants from a wide range of theoretical, case-study, and comparative approaches will address the phenomenon of population movement and the experience of migration in its various qualities.

The agenda for this conference is below.

Co-sponsored by the University of Vienna, the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, and the Center for International Security and Cooperation


 

Bechtel Conference Center

Conferences
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Kenneth Scheve, a professor of political science and expert on the politics of economic policymaking, has been named director of The Europe Center.

The announcement was made Wednesday by Gerhard Casper, director of the institute.

“As we add to our work on governance in developing countries by also focusing on the governance issues of the developed world, including Europe and the United States, Ken will bring just the right expertise and scholarship to the Europe Center,” Casper said.

Scheve succeeds Amir Eshel, the Edward Clark Crossett Professor of Humanistic Studies. Eshel, a professor of German studies and comparative literature, has led The Europe Center and its predecessor – the European Forum – since 2005. Casper thanked Eshel for his eight years of outstanding leadership and added that the emphasis Eshel placed on the humanities will remain a defining element of the center’s work.

The European Forum was founded in 1997 and renamed The Europe Center three years ago. The center has matured into Stanford’s focal point for European policy-oriented research and is part of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Division of International, Comparative and Area Studies.

Scheve (pronounced SHEE-vee) plans to build on the center’s strength as a magnet for faculty and researchers across Stanford who are interested in European issues.

“The mission of The Europe Center is to promote interdisciplinary research on the history, culture, institutions and people of Europe with the idea that that in itself is an important objective,” he said. “Studying Europe with a mix of perspectives from the social sciences and the humanities is a productive way to learn about an array of social and political phenomena that face all societies.”

He said two of the most important issues in international relations – failed states and the role that international institutions play in managing conflict and cooperation – can be better understood through a thorough study and examination of European history, society and current affairs.

“The European Union is the most mature and complex international institution that’s ever been developed,” Scheve said. “Seeing how it both succeeds and struggles to govern is instructive in thinking about how international institutions function in the world more generally. Governance issues within European states, in relation to the EU, and in Europe’s relationships with the rest of world are important public policy problems about which research at Stanford can play a role in informing contemporary policy debates.”

Along with continuing to provide a vibrant forum for faculty, Scheve wants to expand The Europe Center’s relationship with Stanford students.

Looking to the university’s Bing Overseas Studies Program, he sees an opportunity for the center to provide more research and internship opportunities for undergraduates planning to study in Europe.

“We can help prepare them for their overseas studies and help promote undergraduate courses and research opportunities in and about Europe,” he said. “I want us to bridge their educational experience on campus with what happens in the Bing program in Europe.”

For graduate students, Scheve wants to encourage interdisciplinary research by offering grants and fellowships with a particular focus on pre-dissertation and dissertation completion support.

Scheve – who is currently writing a book on the comparative history of the rise of progressive taxation in 19th and 20th century Europe and other advanced economies – has taught at Stanford since 2012.

He previously taught at Yale and the University of Michigan. His first experience with Stanford came in 2005, when he was a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences.

Scheve holds a bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Notre Dame. He earned his doctorate in political science from Harvard in 2000.

All News button
1
-

The United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars on transforming the international landscape through military force in order to enhance America’s national security. But is there any other way? This lecture explores America`s Cold War experience in dealing with the communist states of Eastern Europe in an effort to make them less tyrannical and less hostile to the Western world. The focus will be on economic and psychological warfare, cultural and economic border penetration, and diplomacy as a tool of coercion in particular. The presentation also analyzes these policies in the light of the ideology, goals, strategies and tactics employed by the other side, while also considering the difficulties U.S. policy faces in adequately responding to external challenges. The discussion touches on the changing goals and strategies of U.S. foreign policy in Eastern Europe within the national independence/stability paradigm.

Co-sponsored by the History Department

Building 200 (History Corner)
Room 307

Laszlo Borhi Fulbright Visiting Professor at Indiana University, Bloomington and Senior Research Fellow Speaker the Institute of History, Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Seminars
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

In his blog posting SORT vs. New START: Why the Administration is Leery of a Treaty, Steven Pifer continues with his previous posting Presidents, Nuclear Reductions and the Senate.  He points to the ratification experience between George W. Bush's 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT) and Burak Obama's 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) as the basis for the Obama administration fear that the Republican majority Senate would not consider a treaty for further nuclear reductions on its merits.

All News button
1
Subscribe to North America