Premium
“GATT‐think” with Asymmetric Countries *
Author(s) -
Epifani Paolo,
Vitaloni Juliette
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
review of international economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.513
H-Index - 58
eISSN - 1467-9396
pISSN - 0965-7576
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9396.2006.00654.x
Subject(s) - reciprocity (cultural anthropology) , negotiation , economics , bargaining power , bargaining problem , multilateral trade negotiations , international economics , microeconomics , international trade , commercial policy , political science , psychology , social psychology , law
We argue that a trade agreement which conforms to GATT’s reciprocity rule benefits the (stronger) less trade‐dependent country at the expense of the (weaker) more trade‐dependent country. Reciprocity is so unfavorable to the weaker country that it may be worse off under reciprocity than under the Nash‐ bargaining solution, a “power‐based” approach to trade negotiations that reflects power asymmetries among trading partners. Our results question Bagwell and Staiger’s (1999, 2000) view of reciprocity as a rule that “serves to mitigate the influence of power asymmetries on negotiated outcomes.”