The Experts below are selected from a list of 88785 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Brita Pekarsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
assessing the impact of the australia united states free Trade Agreement on australian and global medicines policy
Globalization and Health, 2005Co-Authors: Thomas Faunce, Peter Drahos, David Henry, Evan Doran, Andrew Searles, Brita PekarskyAbstract:On 1 January 2005, a controversial Trade Agreement entered into force between Australia and the United States. Though heralded by the parties as facilitating the removal of barriers to free Trade (in ways not achievable in multilateral fora), it also contained many Trade-restricting intellectual property provisions and others uniquely related to altering pharmaceutical regulation and public health policy in Australia. The latter appear to have particularly focused on the world-respected process of federal government reimbursement after expert cost-effectiveness evaluation, popularly known as the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme ('PBS'). It remains uncertain what sort of impacts – if any – the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement ('AUSFTA') will have on PBS processes such as reference pricing and their important role in facilitating equitable and affordable access to essential medicines.
Douglas Bandow - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a free Trade Agreement with south korea would promote both prosperity and security
Social Science Research Network, 2010Co-Authors: Douglas BandowAbstract:President Barack Obama took office with a record of skepticism toward free Trade, including several free Trade Agreements negotiated by the Bush administration. The Democratic Congress was even more hostile to liberalizing international commerce. Now the president has made Trade promotion an administration priority. One of the surest strategies to grow the economy and increase higher paying employment is to expand Trade. Thus he has endorsed the free Trade Agreement with South Korea—with as yet undefined changes. He hopes to have an amended version ready at the next G-20 Summit, scheduled for Seoul in November. Although the accord is not perfect, it would substantially increase access to the South Korean market. Both the Republic of Korea and the United States would benefit from increased exports, economic growth, and job creation. The long-term potential is even greater: as South Koreans grow wealthier, they are likely to increase their foreign purchases, and eventual Korean reunification would greatly expand the Korean marketplace for American exporters. The free Trade Agreement also offers important geopolitical benefits. China’s rapid economic growth has helped expand Beijing’s influence throughout East Asia. Indeed, there is now more Trade between South Korea and China than between the South and the United States. As American military dominance fades, the large and productive U.S. economy offers an important alternative form of regional engagement. Washington should seek to expand Trade throughout the Asia-Pacific. Reducing Trade barriers with South Korea is an important first step. The United States should move ahead even if Seoul resists formal renegotiation of the Trade pact. Washington can and should push for further liberalization, but such efforts will be stillborn if the free Trade Agreement is not soon ratified. This is no time to allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good.
Adam Rose - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
estimating economic impacts of the us south korea free Trade Agreement
Economic Systems Research, 2019Co-Authors: Dan Wei, Zhenhua Chen, Adam RoseAbstract:We analyze the economic impacts of the United States-South Korea Free Trade Agreement by applying the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) computable general equilibrium model to highly disaggregated commodity flow data. The analysis calculates the impacts in terms of welfare effects, national economic indicators (such as GDP), and business performance metrics (such as sales revenue), which can be used by a variety of decision-makers. Our results suggest several Trade-offs among these measures. Positive welfare gains between the US and South Korea are about the same in absolute terms, but favor the latter in relative terms, and very heavily so for GDP gains. Moreover, the US is projected to incur a loss of gross output (sales revenue) in several major manufacturing sectors that are heavily concentrated in geographic areas that have been promised a return of jobs by the Trump Administration.
Wilfred J. Ethier - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Trade-Agreement Embarrassment
Social Science Research Network, 2013Co-Authors: Wilfred J. EthierAbstract:The dominant academic literature about Trade Agreements maintains that they are only about national terms-of-Trade manipulation and not at all about purely political concerns. Non-academic economists, commentators, and diplomats by contrast think that Trade Agreements are all about political concerns. There are two substantive and important distinctions between the two views. i) Practitioners maintain that policymakers care virtually not at all about the terms of Trade or about Trade-tax revenue. ii) Practitioners, unlike academics, maintain that Trade-Agreement negotiations themselves change the underlying political economy. Observation of actual Trade policy measures, though not conclusive, suggests that the practitioners are right and that the academics are wrong.
-
The Trade Agreement Embarrassment, Second Version
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Wilfred J. EthierAbstract:The dominant academic literature about Trade Agreements maintains that they are only about national terms-of-Trade manipulation and not at all about purely political concerns. Non-academic economists, commentators, and diplomats by contrast think that Trade Agreements are all about political concerns. There are two substantive and important distinctions between the two views. Practitioners maintain that policymakers care virtually not at all about the terms of Trade or about Trade-tax revenue ii Practitioners, unlike academics, maintain that Trade-Agreement negotiations themselves change the underlying political economy. Observation of actual Trade policy measures, though not conclusive, suggests that the practitioners are right and that the academics are wrong.
-
Punishments and Dispute Settlement in Trade Agreement
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2001Co-Authors: Wilfred J. EthierAbstract:This paper interprets dispute settlement procedures and punishments as responses to the fact that Trade Agreements are incomplete contracts. I argue that this can explain prominent features and has implications for Trade Agreements. If no weight is given to the adjudication phase and if the degree of Trade relatedness is known with certainty, the negotiated Trade Agreement will induce violation of the dispute settlement ruling and will deliver optimal liberalization and the optimal unilateral action. This suggests a central role, in multilateral Trade liberalization, for an implicit Agreement to allow countries to violate commitments if the violation implies no retreat from reciprocity. With the adjudication phase of concern the Trade Agreement will feature less liberalization. There is a presumption that the optimal Trade Agreement features commensurate punishment, or approximately commensurate punishment. The optimal Trade Agreement will likely induce abiding by the ruling when the negotiators attach more importance to the adjudication phase, and violating it when they attach less.
Joel Lexchin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ceta and pharmaceuticals impact of the Trade Agreement between europe and canada on the costs of prescription drugs
Globalization and Health, 2014Co-Authors: Joel Lexchin, Marcandre GagnonAbstract:On a per capita basis, Canadian drug costs are already the second highest in the world after the United States and are among the fastest rising in the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the European Union (EU) and Canada will further exacerbate the rise in costs by:
