To the Honourable Members of the Chamber of Deputies. You are on the right track.
The short answer is yes. The harder, unanswered question is: A body of research including our own papers shows overwhelming evidence that, over the last 20 years or so, trade integration with low-wage manufacturing countries like China has had dramatic effects on the manufacturing landscape in rich countries like the United States and Germany.
It also appears this growing trade exposure is to blame, at least in part, for growing political polarization and increasing support for parties that advocate for populist and protectionist agendas. In our own work, we documented that in Germany during the last three decades, growing import competition from Eastern Europe and China has increased voting for extreme far-right parties, while export access to the same countries appears to have reduced it.
But that leaves a question. For all the research showing that trade shocks that have impacted regional manufacturing employment also had regional effects on political behavior, it is not yet clear what mechanism causes this link.
This represents a larger challenge for economic research. We have far more potential outcomes that we would like to explain than we have natural experiments or variables that cause the outcomes. As a result, research often generates a large number of stand-alone causal effects on many outcomes with relatively little to say about possible causal links between these.
To illustrate, the same types of regional trade shocks have been used to estimate the effect of import competition on manufacturing employment, social transfers, wages, legislators, voting, crime, marriage markets, and patenting. But we have not gotten a clear view of possible causal mechanisms, e.
In some contexts, our lack of a fuller explanation is not a huge problem. For example, import competition may increase crime and reduce patenting, but the additional crimes are probably not being committed by laid-off inventors, and crime is not preventing researchers from inventing.
In other words, there is probably no causal mechanism linking these two outcomes. The search for causal mechanisms is called causal mediation analysis. Existing methods falling under this umbrella allow for the identification of causal effects only under restrictive assumptions.
The most important restriction is that the explanatory variable is assumed to vary exogenously—in plain English, this means that you are effectively assuming the conditions of a randomized control trial. A second important restriction is that existing frameworks do not allow the explanatory variable to have any unobserved effects that also affect the observed mechanism.
What does that mean? Suppose we wanted to ask to what extent the workshop helped with getting a job because it advised students to dress more professionally.
For example, students most likely attend job interview training workshops deliberately and not randomly. The most common solution to this problem is to find some other source of exogenous variation that partly drives the variation one is really interested in.
For example, perhaps the student union accidentally advertised the workshop in some dormitories and not others. A large portion of all applied economics research in non-experimental data—including the entire agenda on regional trade shocks—relies on such instrumental variables.
We developed a method that allows us to statistically estimate causal mechanisms in data where a shock e. Importantly, our method allows for trade to have unobserved effects perhaps anxiety about globalization that in turn influence both labor market outcomes and voting.
As with any statistical framework, we do need to make some assumptions that will not always be appealing.
So we applied this method—identifying the assumption on causal relations and estimating instrumental variables—and reached a surprising finding.
We found that percent of the total effect of trade exposure on populist voting is explained by labor markets. This is an important finding in the current policy debate.
First, it implies that the negative labor market consequences of import competition from low-wage manufacturing countries have been even more consequential at the ballot booth than one might have thought. Second, it implies that trade integration can be a force for political moderation if we can cushion its negative labor market effects.
We are not sure yet. But a plausible hypothesis is that with increasingly fractionalized global supply chains, trading increasingly means working in international teams to bring all the different intermediate products and production steps together into final products.
His research develops empirical tools to infer the causal impacts of such government programs.Fair Trade Versus Free Trade Cohort 4 believes that fair trade is the most prosperous way to trade with other countries.
Both free trade and fair trade have advantages and disadvantages. The researchers in Cohort 4 have established a viewpoint regarding fair trade and free trade.
The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Souls of Black Folk, by W. E. B. Du Bois This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. But free trade as practiced by Adam Smith neo-mercantilists was far from fair trade.
Adam Smith unequal free trade is little more than a philosophy for the continued subtle monopolization of the wealth-producing In a narrow range of discourse, yes, this is a choice one makes. However, in a wider sense, it is not really that much of a choice. The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W.
Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup. The latest news, videos, and discussion topics on Fair Trade. Free Markets China Is a Problem, But Higher Tariffs Are Not the Solution Yes, I want to receive the Entrepreneur newsletter.
The Purdue University Online Writing Lab serves writers from around the world and the Purdue University Writing Lab helps writers on Purdue's campus.