Trans Pacific Partnership Research Paper

Twelve governments recently signed the much-anticipated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), sparking heated debate about its merits. As a primary motivation for this first “mega-regional” agreement, US President Barack Obama argues that the TPP is a way for the USA, and not China or someone else, to write the global trade rules of the future. This begs some important questions, namely which country or countries really did write most of the TPP and thus whose agenda for 21st century trade might it advance? To answer these questions, we compare the recently-released text of the TPP to the language in the 74 previous trade agreements that TPP members signed since 1995. Our text-as-data analyses reveal that the contents of the TPP are taken disproportionately from earlier US trade agreements. The ten preferential trade agreements (PTAs) that most closely match the TPP are all US PTAs. Moreover, the contents of controversial chapters, such as the one on investment, are drawn even more heavily from past US treaty language. Our study and findings apply power-based accounts of international institutions to a landmark new agreement, and portray a more active, template-based process of international diffusion.

Malcolm Turnbull says people won't be casting a national vote until the due time of 2019 – although Labor is working on contingency plans for this year in case he changes his mind or is foxing.

The new TPP means fewer barriers for Australian exports, but there a number of loose ends – not least if the United States decides to rejoin.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is back: experts respond

Deborah Gleeson, La Trobe University; Belinda Townsend, Australian National University; Kimberlee Weatherall, University of Sydney; Pat Ranald, University of Sydney, and Peter Robertson, University of Western Australia

Many provisions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership have been suspended after the United States pulled out. But there's still much to debate about the regional free trade agreement.

Time for costly medicine monopolies to go from TPP trade talks

Belinda Townsend, Australian National University; Deborah Gleeson, La Trobe University; Hazel Moir, Australian National University; Joel Lexchin, University of Sydney, and Ruth Lopert, George Washington University

Negotiators from 11 countries have been racing to resurrect the near-dead Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement before the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit this weekend.

NAFTA renegotiations may see provisions from the Trans-Pacific Partnership revive like zombies. We must remember their failures - on income inequality, labour and environmental protection.

The TPP should still bring enough benefits for the remaining countries to make it worthwhile to go through the trouble of enacting it.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe may have just demonstrated to other world leaders how to possibly approach President Donald Trump.

The agreement could be as good as dead, if, instead of pushing ahead without the US, its members decide to explore bilateral trade agreements with the country.

Many of the US’s current and mooted free trade negotiations are now dead in the water, but that doesn't mean it's game over for free trade.

Security and economic interests, in the guise of the 12-member Trans-Pacific Partnership (seven of which hail from the Asia-Pacific), are causing anxiety among US friends and allies.

To create a resilient domestic economy, certain features of the “old” economy may still be required in China.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is one of President Obama's biggest accomplishments of his second term. Can it survive the anti-trade tide in the race to replace him?

Southeast Asia's biggest economy is eyeing to join the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, already signed by a dozen countries, including Australia.

2016 will be a year of transitions in the Australia-US relationship. Against a backdrop of change are three important issues: the fight against Islamic State, China, and passage of the TPP.

An open letter signed by security experts from around the world is calling on governments to protect encryption rather than undermine it in a quixotic attempt to tackle terrorism.

Australia's plain packaging win over Philip Morris will kill the ISDS bogeyman.

Opposition against Investor-State Dispute Settlement clauses seems likely to fall away as Asian economies flock to the TPP.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership has been described by its backers as a boon for development. But with no concrete commitments, nor any mention of climate, it is really at odds with the UN development agenda.

TPP negotiations have been covered in secrecy, and now as details have been released it only shows a wider democratic deficiency.

Copyright lasts the life of the author plus 70 years before it enters the public domain. But the author and their family are often not the beneficiary. Perhaps it's time for shrink that term.

Categories: 1

0 Replies to “Trans Pacific Partnership Research Paper”

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *