Search results

Misinformation can influence decision-making by fueling individual's belief, prejudices, and stereotypes. In the context of international trade, misinformation refers to the spread of false or misleading information and facts mostly with the malicious intent of maligning reputation of products, services, trade policies of a country and thus negatively influencing liberal trade policies toward that country. Stereotypes and prejudices fueled by misinformation coupled with economic nationalism and populism cast a dark shadow over the liberal international order. Exaggerated claims about unfair trade practices laced with stereotypes, prejudices, and misinformation can fuel tensions and may eventually lead to trade dispute and retaliatory action such as the imposition of tariffs or breakdown of trade blocs. Fake News, as a term, came into prominence recently during the 2016 US elections. The spread of fake news during the election generated remarkable interest among researchers. While most research focused on the effect of misinformation, a few studies have shown the influence of misinformation in changing trade preferences. The intricate connection among trading partners can propagate misinformation. Misinformation can lead policymakers to undertake protectionist policies. However, policies driven by misinformation, taken by major economies, can have strong rippling effects on other trading partners because of their strong network connectedness. Therefore, it motivates us to understand and evaluate international trade in terms of network statistics. This chapter provides an in-depth analysis of the network effects of some major and emerging economic powers involved in bilateral or multilateral trade agreements.

The concept of the “global production network” (GPN) has emerged as a framework for analyzing the intricate connections between a dominant or pivotal firm and its suppliers across various countries. ¹ The expansion of GPNs signifies that trade encompasses not only the final products but also the parts and components (P&C) involved in their production. The reduction of tariff barriers and advancements in transportation and communication technology have facilitated the fragmentation of production processes across different countries. This has led to a significant transformation in the nature and structure of global trade. This chapter aims to synthesize and present this literature. By identifying the key drivers, determinants, and consequences of fragmentation trade through a literature-based approach, this study aids in assessing the opportunities and challenges those lagging countries, like India, encounter in terms of increased participation in GPNs.

This chapter aims to critically analyse the implications that the national protectionist policies have on the global supply and value chains and the relocation of production. The analysis is based on the assumptions that the global economy is facing the possibility of decoupling of many trade connections, and this trend favours de-globalisation processes that have long been promoted by populism, nationalism and economic protectionism. It is concluded that global supply, production and value chains although being economically efficient are no longer any more secure under national protectionist policies, and therefore, the relocation of production processes is mainly due to the increase in the level of income and wages of the developing countries that are the destination and which reduce the advantages to relocate.

It has been already established that the countries that have opened their economies in advance have reaped more benefits compared to those who have done it late. For example, the countries of the West are far away from the countries of the East in terms of the per capita incomes as because, besides others, the magnitudes of trade openness of the former are higher compared to that of the latter. Besides countries, there are some economic groups such as European Union, Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), etc. who have proved the similar growth impacts of trade. There is another group of highly developing economies, with the acronym of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), which has proved as being highly beneficiaries of the trade liberalisation. But the magnitudes of trade openness and their impacts in these countries are subject to further explorations using modern data. The present chapter aims to compute trade openness using two different methods for the BRICS countries and make association of it with growth and foreign currency reserves (FCRs) for the period 1991–2019. In addition, the study examines whether the FCR is sustainable. It observes positive and negative correlations between economic openness and gross domestic product (GDP) growth and FCR in the member nations leading to mean that trade openness has definitely contributed to the growth as well as accumulation of FCRs. But, the trends in the FCRs are unsustainable in the BRICS nations.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected entire humanity, sustainable development and international trade. Even if international trade is in the recovery phase, COVID-19 pandemic's adverse effects on sustainable development and trade continue to be experienced globally. Furthermore, break out of the war in Ukraine (WIU) further affected not only Ukraine and Russia but also other countries. Countries have started to experience adverse impacts of the WIU more deeply as this war continues. From the global sustainable development and trade perspectives, the WIU impacts' magnitude is affected by the significance of Ukraine and Russia's role in and contribution to the global economy and trade (e.g. agriculture, energy). All countries, including developed, developing and under-developed countries, have started to be affected at different levels due to the adverse impacts of this war. Based on an in-depth literature review, this chapter aims to investigate the WIU's impacts on global sustainable development and international trade. Furthermore, effects of the WIU on climate change and on the fight against climate change are investigated within the scope of this chapter. This chapter is expected to be useful to all stakeholders of sustainable development including politicians and researchers.

One of the major objectives of India's National Auto Policy (NAP) (2018) is to help the country emerge as a hub for automotive production and research and development (R&D). In order to fulfill this long-term objective, two policies had been proposed by NAP (2018). First, possibility of exploring regional trade agreements (RTAs) with leading countries, having attractive markets for Indian players, was considered. Second, the policy aimed to evaluate the potential implications of joining the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) WP.29 1958 agreement within the next 5 years for tackling the potential major technical barriers to trade (TBT), as India's current accession in UNECE WP.29 1998 agreement may not be sufficient for ensuring mutual recognition of standards in many of the partner countries. India is presently engaged in RTA negotiations with several developed and developing countries, with potentially beneficial repercussions for automobile exports. However, the question of accession to UNECE WP.29 1958 agreement has not received similar attention of late, which may restrain the anticipated sectoral export growth, particularly through RTA-led market access outcomes. Given this background, the current analysis considers India's potential sectoral trade growth with eight partner countries, in the case of RTA-led tariff reforms, through a WITS-SMART simulation exercise. The obtained simulation results indicate that India needs to focus on the technical standard harmonization question for reaping the full benefits arising from tariff reforms in several upcoming RTAs, for boosting auto-exports in the post-RTA period.

The liberalization initiative commenced in India from 1991 onwards, replacing the four-decade long import substitution policy. The primary objective was to enhance the role of foreign and private investment, in line with the newly embraced outward-oriented growth model. The government had undertaken several policy initiatives since then, especially to strengthen the manufacturing sector which plays an important role in the economic development of any country. The current study evaluates the effects of the liberalization policy in India on industrial outcomes. Recent studies have found that when firm heterogeneity is present in trade models, reforms will lead to a decrease in the number of firms and a rise in their average size (Melitz, 2003). A dataset of 24 manufacturing industries had been used in the current study. We test empirically whether liberalization had led to a rise in the average size of establishments as stated in the literature. We also attempt to analyze the magnitude of trade costs in terms of the impact of reforms on wages and prices. The empirical analysis based on the difference-in-difference (DID) estimation method shows that on average, trade reforms do not lead to an increase in the real wages and average size of establishments. In addition, prices appear to increase in the long run due to liberalization, with potential ramifications.