38
Esty pointed out that domestic environmental regulations could act as nontariff
barriers by using an example of the tuna-dolphin case.
36
The U.S. banned tuna imports
from Mexico since the fishing methods in Mexico did not meet
the standards to protect
dolphins. In 1991, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) declared that the
U.S. violated GATT rules for imposing the ban. He suggested that new issues like
climate change would increase the conflicts between domestic regulations and trade rules.
Renewable energy protectionism seems similar with the tuna-dolphin case, but it
is different in that domestic trade and industrial policies conflict with the trade of
environmental goods. In other words, the conflict in
the past was environmental
regulation versus trade policy, but the current conflict is trade/industrial policy versus the
trade of environmental goods. The current phenomenon is less transparent and more
complicated compared to the past conflicts between domestic regulations and trade.
The rise of “murky” protectionism and green protectionism
Although the global financial crisis in 2007 has generated much concern on the
rise of protectionism, no significant increase of protectionist measures
was observed in
recent years.
37
Countries attempted to use trade policies to address the crisis but it was
not very substantial compared to the degree before the crisis. The opposite direction of
actions was also observed. Many countries reduced the degree of protection selectively
36
Esty, Daniel C. "Bridging the trade-environment divide."
The Journal of Economic
Perspectives
15, no. 3 (2001): 113-130.
37
Kee, Hiau Looi,
Cristina Neagu, and Alessandro Nicita. "Is protectionism on the rise?
Assessing national trade policies during the crisis of 2008."
Review of Economics and
Statistics
95, no. 1 (2013): 342-346.
39
for some products. Governments’ use of trade policies has become heterogeneous since
they use both restricting and liberalizing trade policies in recent years.
38
Some argued that governments used more “murky” form of protectionist
measures to fight against the crisis, while they did not use more traditional trade policies.
Murky form of protectionism refers to “abuses of legitimate discretion which are used to
discriminate against foreign goods,
companies, workers and investors.”
39
This is murky
since it is not clearly against the WTO rules. Environmental and health regulations,
stimulus package, or license requirements can be used as this murky protectionist
measures by providing favor to domestic products.
A few empirical studies show the evidence of murky protectionism. According to
the analysis of
the Global Trade Alert, less than half of the protectionist measures were
the traditional instruments such as tariffs and anti-dumping measures after the global
financial crisis.
40
A majority of the other protectionist measures were less transparent
instruments. Aggawal and Evenett found that the countries with more policies
discriminating foreign interests tended to use more policies
covered by weak or no WTO
rule by investigating all state intervention in seven major economies for three years after
38
Bollen, Yelter, Ferdi De Ville, and Jan Orbie. "EU trade policy: persistent
liberalisation, contentious protectionism."
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: