It often seems difficult, when we try to compare the vices and virtues of protectionism and free trade, not to sink into the flaws of a caricatural ideological debate. While the crisis has given this controversy to the front of the stage, The life of ideas offers a series of articles on contrasting effects and new forms of protectionism.
Since the start of the crisis, the question of protectionism has imposed itself vigorously in the public debate. Indeed, the temptation is great for political decision -makers to mitigate the effects of the recession by isolating their country from external torments: to close borders to foreign products would be a means of protecting domestic industries (and therefore jobs) of international competition, and to respond to strong demands for support made by certain strata of the population particularly affected by the crisis.
However, there is no consensus on the subject. For some, protectionism could be, if defined on the right geographic and sectoral scale, a tool of contra-cyclic economic policy ; It would also be a way to deal, at the same time, of the competition deemed sometimes unfair exercised by countries with lower environmental and social standards. For others, the protectionism of some would only only generate the protectionism of others: the policies led by the different countries would therefore neutralize each other. They would also weigh strongly on long -term growth prospects and exacerbate international tensions, on the model of what happened in the 1930s.
A year after the start of the crisis, The life of ideas decides to come back to this debate. Through the contributions of economists and historians, we retrieve the genesis of protectionism, its modalities as well as its potential and/or proven effects on businesses, workers, consumers, countries.
The red thread of the file is undoubtedly heterogeneity. Heterogeneity of the motivations of protectionism, recommended to safeguard sectors, to protect the environment or to defend the extended social protection model chosen by certain countries. Heterogeneity of the forms of protectionism, traditional for some such as taxes or quotas, and more recent for others with the strength of health standards or anti -dumping appeals to the World Trade Organization (Omc). Heterogeneity of the effects, finally, protectionism and its symmetrical, commercial liberalization, affecting companies differently according to their initial productivity, individuals according to their level of education and their degree of geographic and professional mobility, and countries according to the structure of their exchanges and existing social protection systems.
The confrontation of the various points of view expressed in this file shows that it would be illusory to imagine providing a simple response to the debate on the opportunity of protectionist measures. Protectionism and free trade make winners and losers. Decision making can only carry out an adequate initial diagnosis, and then becomes a affair of weighting the gains and losses generated by the different options.
Contents:
- David Todd, “ Protectionism, internationalist liberalism », 10/20/2009.
- Matthieu Calame, “ Advocacy for a global agricultural policy », 05/23/2008.
- David Todd, “ Free trade or protectionism ? », About Frank Trentmann, Free Trade Nation (Oxford University Press, 2008), 03/07/2008.
- Igor Moullier, “ French preference for protectionism », About David Todd, France’s economic identity (Grasset, 2008), 01/12/2008.
- Thomas Vendryes, “ Washington consensus failures », About Dani Rodrik, Nations and globalization(La Découverte, 2008), 09/03/2009.
- Hylke Vandenbussche, “ Anti -dumping measures and their effects on business productivity », 10/27/2009.
- Nina Pavcnik, “ Free trade benefits and costs for developing countries », 5/11/2009.
- Anne-Célia Disdier, “ Regulatory standards and international exchanges », 2/12/2009.