Three distinguished authors—Dani Rodrik, William Reinsch,

and Richard Partington—have offered their perspectives on

these subjects. Drawing from their insights, I've listed a few
economic viewpoints, either in support of or in disagreement
with the authors' positions. This analysis not only encapsulates
the essence of their arguments but also juxtaposes them with
established economic theories, providing a comprehensive
understanding of the multifaceted nature of global trade
dynamics.

Rodrik (Chapter 3: Why Doesn’t Everyone Get the Case for

Free Trade?)

1. Free trade is not inherently natural and only emerges

when specific political and intellectual interests align.

Rodrik posits that free trade doesn't naturally or automatically

emerge in the global economic landscape. Instead, it's the result
of a blend of political determination and intellectual agreement.
This means that free trade is shaped as much by socio-political
choices as by economic principles. As an economics major, I
concur with Rodrik. While economists typically view trade
through theoretical lenses, such as the Ricardian model of
comparative advantage, these models can sometimes be overly
idealistic. In reality, political negotiations and power struggles
deeply influence trade policies and agreements. For instance, the
Heckscher-Ohlin model theorizes that nations will export
products that capitalize on their abundant resources and import
those that rely on their limited resources. Yet, this model's
forecasts frequently diverge from actual trade trends,
underscoring the role of factors beyond economics.

The benefits of trade can be likened to those of technological

progress, leading to overall societal gains.

Drawing parallels between trade and technological progress,

Rodrik underscores that both can foster societal advancements.
Yet, just as technology can yield uneven outcomes (like job
losses in specific sectors), trade can too. This analogy
illuminates the dual facets of both phenomena. While some
argue that trade and technological progress can result in Pareto
improvements, benefiting some without disadvantaging others, I
contend that they can also lead to situations where gains for
some come at the detriment of others. My viewpoint finds
resonance in the Stolper-Samuelson theorem, which suggests
that trade can cause real income reductions for certain
production factors in a nation. This emphasizes that even if there
are collective benefits (macroeconomic basis), individual sectors
(microeconomics basis) might suffer losses.

Rodrik (Chapter 4: Bretton Woods, GATT, and the WTO: Trade

in a Politicized World)

Recognizing the political nature of trade is essential for

economists. It means that purely economic arguments might
not always prevail in trade negotiations.

Historically, trade policy and politics have been deeply

interconnected, and the aspiration of separating trade policy
from domestic politics has yet to be achieved. Rodrik points out
that trade has consistently been a theater for political agendas.
From the mercantilist period to today, trade decisions have been
molded by internal political dynamics, mirroring the interplay of
power, vested interests, and national ideologies. I agree with
Rodrik's perspective, believing economists must acknowledge
the political underpinnings of trade. This suggests that decisions
based solely on economic rationale might only sometimes
dominate trade discussions. The political economy of trade
theory further supports this, indicating that trade policies are
more a result of negotiations among domestic interest groups
than overarching national welfare objectives, and perhaps this is
the reason people question, "How free trade benefits our lives?"

The WTO introduced a robust international conflict

resolution system, even compelling major powers to alter
their policies.

The WTO has rolled out a formidable international dispute

resolution framework, even prompting significant nations to
recalibrate their policies. Rodrik emphasizes the potency and
reach of the WTO's dispute resolution apparatus. Distinct from
its predecessors, the WTO's system is assertive, ensuring nations
remain true to their obligations and settle trade conflicts in
alignment with the organization's stipulations. The prowess of
this mechanism accentuates the vital role of resilient institutions
in championing global trade.

Reflecting on my undergraduate Game Theory class, the

concept of repeated games offers insight into why nations
comply with WTO decisions. Within the ambit of the WTO and
global trade, envision each nation as a contender in a strategic
game. Every nation is presented with a dilemma: to collaborate
by abiding by WTO directives or to diverge by overlooking or
contravening them. A standout tactic in such continuous
interactions is the "tit-for-tat" approach. A contender initiates
with collaboration and subsequently replicates the preceding
action of the adversary. If the opponent collaborated in the prior
move, the contender reciprocates in the subsequent one. If there
was a divergence, the contender also diverges in the next move.
This approach fosters a compelling drive for mutual
collaboration. Should a nation diverge from WTO directives, its
counterparts might respond similarly, culminating in disrupted
trade ties and potential economic downturns.

By remaining steadfast to WTO decisions and fostering

collaboration, nations can cultivate a consistent and foreseeable
trade landscape. Such stability can catalyze enhanced trade,
investments, and economic prosperity, enriching all involved
entities. On the flip side, if nations consistently diverge, mutual
trust dwindles, ushering in a volatile trade scenario, potential
trade conflicts, and economic setbacks.
Reinsch ("The False Choice of Free Trade vs. Protectionism")

Trade policy has always been intertwined with politics due

to its significant domestic implications.

Reinsch highlights that the realm of trade extends beyond just

economic factors, deeply entwined with political nuances.
Decisions in trade can have cascading effects on local industries,
affecting employment and community dynamics, thereby
becoming a nexus for political discussions and tactics. This
sentiment resonates with Rodrik's perspective, suggesting that
economists should consider trade's intricate political ties. The
endowment factor model, which investigates how countries
establish a trade equilibrium based on their resource allocation,
indicates that a country's trade approach can be influenced by its
resource abundance. I believe this model might elucidate the
varied stances countries adopt when confronted with "free trade"
versus "protectionism" policy decisions. Specifically, capital-
rich nations seem inclined towards free trade, whereas labor-
abundant countries might lean more towards protectionism.
While globalization has enabled global supply chains and
interconnected economies, it has also left some feeling left
behind.

Reinsch underscores the dual nature of globalization. While it

fosters economic expansion and international cooperation, it
simultaneously amplifies disparities, leaving certain societal
groups feeling marginalized or adversely impacted by the swift
tide of global assimilation. I believe economists should weigh
both the broad-scale advantages and the granular-level
challenges posed by globalization. Proponents of free trade
globalization often exhibit a bias, focusing predominantly on the
macroeconomic aspects and overlooking the microeconomic
intricacies. The Environmental Kuznets CurveLinks to an
external site. posits that as a nation progresses, economic
inequality initially rises and subsequently diminishes. The
trajectory of globalization could be skewing this curve,
intensifying disparities during specific stages.

Richard Partington ("Is free trade always the answer?")

The postwar consensus towards economic cooperation
between wealthy nations is being re-evaluated in light of
recent global events.

Partington emphasizes the reevaluation of the once-dominant

faith in free trade and economic collaboration that gained
momentum post-World War II. This reassessment may stem
from a myriad of reasons, such as geopolitical realignments, a
surge in nationalism, and economic imbalances. Given the
evolving global scenario, historical economic tactics may not
retain their efficacy in contemporary or forthcoming contexts.
It's imperative for economists to remain flexible and receptive to
reassessment. The gravity model of trade posits that the trade
volume between two nations correlates with their economic
magnitude and is inversely related to their geographical
separation. With the shifting global contours, the determinants
shaping trade could undergo transformations.

While tariffs and protectionist measures can encourage

domestic production, they can also be counterproductive.

Partington brings attention to the nuanced nature of

protectionism. On the surface, it appears advantageous in the
short run, shielding local industries. However, it can spawn
inefficiencies, invite retaliatory actions from other nations, and
impede sustained growth. Protectionism, while offering
immediate relief, might carry long-term repercussions. It's
crucial to juxtapose short-term gains with potential long-term
ramifications, a consideration that politicians frequently
overlook. The infant industry rationale champions
protectionism, positing that budding industries require a shield
against global competitors until they attain maturity and
competitiveness. Yet, this safeguard can breed inefficiencies if
industries grow overly dependent on such protection. Striking
the right equilibrium between free trade and protectionism
emerges as a pressing challenge for policymakers, economists,
and globally-aware citizens alike in today's world.

Reference:

Halton, C. (2019). Simon Kuznets Definition.

Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/simon-
kuznets.aspLinks to an external site.
Kopp, C. (2019). The Heckscher-Ohlin Model in Economics:
Definition and Example.
Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/heckschero
hlin-model.aspLinks to an external site.

The Investopedia Team. (2023, September 12). How Do Factor

Endowments Impact a Country’s Comparative
Advantage? Investopedia. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an
swers/041615/how-do-factor-endowments-impact-countrys-
comparative-advantage.asp#:~:text=The%20factor
%20endowment%20theory%2C%20alsoLinks to an external
site.