Abstract

Many factors appear to underlie the increasing willingness of governments to adopt restrictive trade measures, even while reiterating their basic commitment to an open and liberal trading system. The survey in the preceding section leads to the conclusion that the issue is complex, that a multiplicity of factors—economic and social—are at work, and that explanation must be sought in terms of the interaction of these factors.

Many factors appear to underlie the increasing willingness of governments to adopt restrictive trade measures, even while reiterating their basic commitment to an open and liberal trading system. The survey in the preceding section leads to the conclusion that the issue is complex, that a multiplicity of factors—economic and social—are at work, and that explanation must be sought in terms of the interaction of these factors.

Recent experience suggests that perhaps the most crucial factor—and the one most likely to influence policy choices toward protection—is the extent and duration of existing unemployment, both overall and sectoral, or the threat of increased unemployment. In a period of high unemployment, especially if there is serious unemployment in sectors open to competition from imports, the demands for the authorities to take action may become politically difficult to resist. And the case for affirmative government action may appear all the more compelling if the affected industry is heavily concentrated in certain regions, thus making the economic well-being of those regions dependent on the maintenance of activity in that industry.

A number of factors, both cyclical and structural, have been held responsible for the severity and persistence of current unemployment and the consequent resurgence of protectionist sentiments. These include the decline in domestic and foreign demand associated with the recession of recent years, the increasing international competition, large-scale additions to global capacity in certain sectors, the difficulties of making structural adjustments in industrial countries, demographic trends, and short-term monetary disturbances.

While the relative importance of these various factors differs from one sector to another and among countries, one or more of them have contributed to the emergence of protectionist pressures in all major sectors recently affected by trade measures. Thus, the contention that recovery from the recession will by itself eliminate the pressures for protection must be examined against this background.

Cyclical Factors

The pressures for protectionist actions have intensified since the worldwide recession of 1974–75. The characteristics of this recession need not be elaborated. It may, however, be recalled that its onslaught was more rapid and dramatic than that of previous postwar downturns, that it was unusually severe and tenacious, and that it affected all major industrial countries at the same time. The volume of world trade and the real output of the industrial countries actually declined in 1975 (Table 5).

Table 5.

Growth in Real Output of Industrial Countries and Volume of Imports, 1962–77

(In per cent)

article image
Sources: National reports and Fund staff estimates.

Compound annual rates of change.

Data on unemployment in the major industrial countries in 1970–77 are given in Table 6. In all the 11 countries, unemployment by 1975 was at or above previous postwar high rates, and in several countries the rate continued to rise in 1976 and 1977.

Table 6.

Selected OECD Countries: Unemployment Rates, 1970–771

(In per cent of labor force)

article image
Source: National statistical records.

The data are based on labor force sample surveys (Canada, Italy, Japan, and United States), unemployment office statistics (Belgium, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Netherlands, and United Kingdom), unemployment insurance statistics (Ireland), and trade union benefit statistics (Denmark).

Cyclical factors have been held responsible for shortfalls in demand in several sectors, including footwear, meat, and shipbuilding. They have been emphasized in particular in the case of the steel industry, which is subject to a pronounced stock cycle, making the industry very sensitive to changes in economic conditions. The weakness of domestic demand was particularly marked for structural steel, owing to depressed activity in construction. For example, in 1975 alone total apparent consumption of steel fell by 17 per cent in the oecd countries as a whole and by more than 20 per cent in several of them. The contraction of domestic markets sharply intensified the pressure to find new outlets. There were frequent complaints that much of the steel that entered world trade in 1977 was sold at below cost.36

While the weakness of world demand has been held responsible to a large extent for the current problems of some industries, the effects of the world recession on demand and production have brought to the fore some longer-term structural difficulties due to other reasons, such as the creation and likely continued existence of significant excess capacities. Thus, while the recovery of world demand would alleviate current difficulties, the problems are not likely to be solved for some time and are likely to recur in the future. In addition, the long gestation period of investments in some sectors and the difficulty of slowing down ongoing projects will add further to excess capacities as projects initiated in earlier years (by new and old producers) are completed. These issues are discussed in more detail below.

Competition from Imports

One of the most frequently cited arguments for resorting to trade restrictions—whether advanced by industry or trade union spokesmen pressing for specific actions in particular sectors, or by governments to explain the reasons for a particular restriction—is the increase in imports. At the industrial or sectoral level, apart from the implied or stated contention that the lack of employment opportunities is the result of higher imports, the argument for protectionism is frequently couched in terms of a particular industry’s “exposure” to imports or of its “dependence” on imports and, by implication, on the decisions of foreign suppliers to produce or to sell to the domestic market. Since the oil crisis of 1973, such arguments appear to have gained greater currency and are often presented in terms of domestic and foreign market shares, or import-penetration ratios, i.e., the proportion of domestic consumption (production minus exports plus imports) accounted for by imports. Decisions by importing countries to impose import quotas or to enter into export restraint arrangements often take into account the increased degree of import penetration in a particular sector, and the level of restrictions is set, implicitly at least, in relation to some concept of a desirable or optimal level of imports or of import penetration. For example, recent investigations by the U.S. International Trade Commission covering a wide range of U.S. industries petitioning for one or another form of import relief include data not only on imports but also on import-penetration ratios.37 Also, the explanations given by French authorities of the concept of “organized free trade” include references to the presumably unacceptably high levels of import penetration.38

In recent years, the justification for protectionist actions has been increasingly based not on the level of, but on the rate of change in, import penetration, often in conjunction with the identification of the exporting countries most responsible for this change. As shown in the preceding section surveying trade actions, import-penetration ratios have risen sharply in a relatively short period in some instances, and most of the restrictive trade measures adopted by industrial countries in recent years have been in response to imports from Japan and from developing countries.

The growth and dynamism of Japan as an industrial nation and a main force in world trade have become a major factor in international trade discussions. Japan’s trade surplus increased significantly in recent years in spite of virtually total dependence on imports of oil and other key raw materials. The increase was due to sharply higher trade surpluses in semimanufactures and manufactures: the deficit in respect of almost all other major categories widened, in some cases significantly, since the mid-1960s. More specifically, the sharply higher trade surpluses in semimanufactures and manufactures since 1970 have been due almost entirely to trade in iron and steel and in engineering products, as Japan restructured its export trade away from minor consumer goods toward heavy manufactures and technologically advanced goods (Chart 1). These developments are also reflected in Japan’s share of world imports of these commodities, which for iron and steel increased from 17 per cent in 1970 to 24 per cent in 1976 and for engineering products increased from 9 per cent in 1970 to 13 per cent in 1976. Comparable cross-country information, which would make it possible to assess the effect of such developments on the Japanese share of foreign markets for these products, is generally not available, but it is likely that the Japanese share increased noticeably for numerous other products. Data on Japan’s share in world imports are given in Appendix IV.

Chart 1.
Chart 1.

Trade Balances of Japan and Developing Countries

(In billions of U.S. dollars)

Source: Based on data provided by the GATT secretariat. Comparable data for 1971 are not available.1 Excluding oil exporting countries.

In the case of developing countries, while both the overall trade deficit and the deficit in trade in manufactures widened considerably in recent years, there was a noticeable improvement in the balance of trade in textiles and clothing (Chart 1). The share of developing countries in world imports of clothing rose from 22 per cent in 1970 to 32 per cent in 1975 (see Appendix V). The share of imports from developing countries in the apparent consumption of major industrial countries increased from 2.6 per cent in 1971–72 to 3.6 per cent in 1973–74 in respect of textiles and from 4.1 per cent in 1971–72 to 6.0 per cent in 1973–74 in respect of clothing (Appendix VI). The level of import penetration remains low even for textiles and clothing taken as a whole, but data on more disaggregated product categories would show much higher levels of import penetration.

Developing countries have emerged in recent years as serious competitors in a widening range of manufactured products.39 The associated changes in the pattern of trade resulting from this development run counter to traditional perceptions of international trade, in which industrial countries exported manufactures in exchange for raw materials.40 The increased competitiveness of exports from developing countries, especially in the more traditional export lines (e.g., textiles, clothing, footwear, and other consumer goods), is generally ascribed to lower labor costs. The potential comparative advantage on account of lower labor costs (which, of course, could be offset by productivity differentials) is illustrated by the following tabulation of hourly wage rates in the clothing industry in 13 developed and developing countries in August 1976 (wage rates are in U.S. dollars): 41

article image

The increase in imports from low-cost sources has created problems for some industries in industrial countries, especially those that are relatively labor intensive, have higher labor costs, and are unable to increase productivity to ensure their continued competitiveness. For example, in the eec in the period 1972–75, the number employed in textile and clothing enterprises with 20 or more workers was reduced from 2.84 million to 2.51 million, and the reduction may have been as high as half a million if smaller enterprises are taken into account. More than half of the reduction in employment, or 168,400, took place in the ready-made clothing industry, which in 1975 accounted for 43 per cent of employment in the eec textile and clothing industry. In addition, 76,600 jobs were lost in the knitting industry, 45,400 jobs in the wool industry, and 31,200 jobs in the cotton industry. In the United States, employment in the apparel industry in 1975 was nearly one fourth below its 1969 peak. As another example, between 1970 and 1976 employment in the footwear industry declined by 20 per cent in the United States and by about 10 per cent in Canada. Although the increase in imports cannot be held entirely accountable for the sharp declines in employment, it has been responsible for much of the periodic resurgence of protectionist pressures in these sectors.

It has been claimed that lower wages impart an “unfair” advantage to foreign competition. Imports from low-wage countries have been characterized as “social dumping.” A discussion of these claims, charged as they are with social and ethical overtones, is beyond the scope of this study. They appear to be a variant of the “cheap labor” arguments of an earlier period and as such are essentially an attack on the concept of comparative advantage and efficient allocation of resources. Claims of “social dumping” have in particular been used in support of demands for restrictions on imports from developing countries of textiles, clothing, footwear, and consumer electronic equipment—sectors in which the share of developing countries in world trade has grown particularly rapidly in recent years.42

Rapid Emergence of Excess Capacities

For some industries, the problems associated with significant excess capacities can be expected to be alleviated as aggregate demand continues to recover. For other industries, however, excessive additions to capacities in recent years have resulted in structural imbalances that the recovery of demand can be expected only to alleviate, not to eliminate. Two key sectors subject to these latter conditions are steel and shipbuilding.

Steel

Whereas as recently as 1974–75 there were fears of a worldwide steel shortage, recent projections indicate that demand will fall short of supply through 1980, and on the basis of current production plans the balance between world supply and consumption may not begin to be restored until 1985.43 The imbalance between capacity and production in the oecd countries of Europe is shown in Chart 2. Large additions to capacity were also undertaken in new sources of supply (Brazil, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, Eastern Europe, and some other developing countries). Products from these sources, often produced at lower cost, compete with traditional suppliers, not only in the latter’s domestic markets but also in export markets.

Chart 2.
Chart 2.

Actual Investment Expenditure, Crude Steel Capacity, and Crude Steel Production: Trends in OECD Countries of Europe Since 1960

Source: OECD, The Iron and Steel Industry in 1975 (Paris, 1977), p. 45.1 Excluding Norway from 1964 to 1967, excluding Turkey in 1964 and 1965, and including Finland since 1968. including Finland since 1968.2 Including Finland since 1968.

Between 1974 and 1977, employment in the eec steel industry declined by some 60,000, or by about 8 per cent of the total work force in this sector, and in the third quarter of 1977 some 91,000 employees were working part time. In the United States, employment in the iron and steel industry declined from 458,500 in 1965 to 403,100 in 1970 and 339,000 in 1976.

Given the social and political importance of each nation’s steel industry—stemming in particular from the concentration of steel plants in certain geographic regions and the strategic role ascribed to the industry—agreement on sharing the costs of restructuring is likely to be difficult to achieve. Furthermore, given the technological characteristics of the industry, insistence on maintaining production facilities in every country would result in permanent excess capacities. Thus, although in the short term the prospects for a recovery of demand for steel products will depend crucially upon the pace of general economic recovery, the structural problems in the steel sector will require the adoption of specific longer-term policies to promote adjustment.

The major producing countries have, in principle, already recognized the need to evolve such longer-term adjustment policies. Thus, the oecd ad hoc Working Group on the Steel Industry concluded in November 1977 that “sustained priority attention must be given to the long-term need of restructuring and modernization, where necessary, to promote a rational allocation of productive resources with an aim to achieving fully competitive enterprises,” and that “any immediate measure must be consistent” with this longer-term objective “as well as with the free and fair flow of international trade.” 44

Shipbuilding

A serious worldwide imbalance between productive capacity and demand has also emerged in the shipbuilding industry. The roots of the problem can be traced to the highly optimistic forecasts of future demand made in the 1960s and early 1970s, which were based on the rapid world economic growth experienced in those years. These forecasts were translated into commensurately heavy investment and a large expansion of capacity. The problem of excess capacity was apparent even before the oil crisis of 1973, and there would have been serious difficulties even in the absence of the subsequent sharp decline in demand for tankers. The evolution of the share in production of both new and old shipbuilding countries is shown in Table 7.

Table 7.

Shipbuilding: Shares of World Production, 1955–76

(In per cent of grt)

article image
Source: Commission des Communautés Européennes, Assainissement du secteur de la construction navale dans la Communauté (Brussels, December 6, 1977), p. 2. Or see “Rationalization of Shipbuilding Sector in Community,” in Europe Documents, Agence Internationale d’Information pour la Presse (Brussels), No. 979, December 23, 1977, p. 3.

Association of West European Shipbuilders (EEC countries, Finland, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden).

Annual world production during 1974–76, based on orders received in earlier years, rose to about 33 million gross register tons (grt). Against this, the projected annual demand during the rest of the 1970s and the early years of the 1980s is estimated at 10–13 million grt.45 In 1977 production was estimated at 20 million grt owing to the carry-over of orders from previous years: with present capacity estimated at 39 million grt, the full brunt of the problem is likely to be felt in 1978 and 1979 (see Table 8).

Table 8.

Shipbuilding: Production, 1975, and Projected Production, 1980 and 1985

(In million cgrt unless otherwise stated) 1

article image
Source: Commission des Communautés Européennes, Assainissement du secteur de la construction navale dans la Communauté (Brussels, December 6, 1977), Annex I, p. 6.

Compensated gross register ton (cgrt) takes into account the amount of work per gross register ton (grt).

Association of West European Shipbuilders (EEC countries, Finland, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden).

A number of measures have been adopted to cope with these problems. On the national level, policies have included employment measures (e.g., elimination of overtime, reduced working hours, encouragements to leave, and minimum recruitment). It has been estimated that since 1975 the number of jobs available in the eec shipbuilding industry has been reduced by about 15,000, or 8 per cent of employment in that industry, and cuts in activity in coming years may reduce employment by a further 75,000. Adjustment to the new market conditions has been difficult; and in some countries, rather than encouraging adjustment, governments have provided support to their national shipbuilding industries in order to maintain a high level of employment. Promotion of national shipbuilding has taken many forms. In some shipyards work is maintained by placing orders for naval vessels, but in most cases intervention is financial. It has been estimated that assistance now being granted in Europe to overcome the price advantage of competitors is EUR 600 million a year.46 If the level of employment in shipbuilding is to be maintained, such aid would have to increase because activity is expected to continue to drop and competition from other countries to continue to grow.

At the international level, a Working Party of the oecd was created in the mid-1960s to try to reduce trade barriers. Two arrangements were concluded through the Working Party, including a general, renewable, three-year arrangement for the removal of obstacles to trade in ships,47 and an understanding on oecd export credits specifying minimum credit terms. In May 1976 the member countries of the Working Party agreed on “General Guidelines for Government Policies in the Shipbuilding Industry”; one of the purposes is an appropriate reduction of productive capacity in order to restore a balance between supply and demand. Also, a reporting system has been established to allow the oecd to monitor new orders, order books, production, employment, etc., in the shipbuilding sector.

The longer-term problem of the shipbuilding industry is its adaptation to the future level of demand, taking into account some 4 million grt of capacity outside the industrial countries and the intentions of some countries to expand capacity substantially.

Need and Difficulty of Structural Adjustment

While the recent surge in protectionism has coincided with extraordinary supply shocks and a severe worldwide recession, it also has roots in longer-term developments. These include the stagnation or deceleration of population growth in the industrial countries, the tendency of wage differentials within these economies to be maintained or even narrowed, and, as discussed above, the growing shift of comparative advantage in certain products to the developing countries.48

The stagnation or slow growth of population in industrial countries means that in order for the more dynamic sectors to achieve their growth potential, adequate increases in labor productivity or declines in activity and employment in other sectors are required. While relative wages should reflect these differentials in productivity among sectors, a recent study of manufacturing in Western Europe found that, except for the Federal Republic of Germany, there were greater disparities in the rates of growth of productivity than in the rates of wage increase, and that there was a significant negative relationship between the two variables.49 In other words, the stickiness of relative wages has meant that wages have risen at broadly similar rates despite differences in the growth of productivity among sectors. The effect is that, despite secular labor mobility, intersectoral transfers of labor have not been encouraged through the wage mechanism. With wages rising faster than productivity in the less dynamic industries, profitability has declined. At the same time, many of these less dynamic industries have also had to cope with increased external pressures owing to growing competition from foreign sources of supply. The pressure for higher prices to improve profitability—which, to a varying extent, could be achieved through relief from import competition—and the competition from imports have contributed significantly to the gradual building up of protectionist pressures.

The process of structural adjustment, however, faces certain impediments, and the success of programs of adjustment—whether carried out by firms or sponsored by governments—depends to a large extent on the severity of these impediments. In particular, the reallocation of resources is a slow and often costly process and one that usually meets with considerable resistance from both industry and trade unions, as the gains from alternative uses of resources are not so perceived by the affected groups and economic stimuli are not sufficient. Also, it is often difficult to readapt or relocate the work force in the affected industry because the sectors most seriously affected are likely to employ a higher share of older, or other relatively less mobile, workers than industry as a whole. This problem is compounded where there are concentrations of unskilled labor—frequently the group that is in jeopardy—in particular regions. It must also be noted that it is considerably easier to achieve structural adjustment in a buoyant economy than in a sluggish one: in a buoyant economy, labor mobility is greater than in an economy characterized by high unemployment and reduced opportunities for resource use.50

Adjustment Assistance

In recent discussions of protectionism in various forums, there have been frequent calls, especially from developing countries, for adjustment assistance as an alternative to restrictive trade actions by developed countries.51 From an international viewpoint, the purpose of adjustment assistance is to allow the pursuit of liberal trading policies by alleviating the hardships associated with the need to adjust to the increased imports that may result from such policies. To this extent, the use of “escape clause” measures (i.e., temporary restrictions in response to a sudden surge of imports that injures or threatens injury) should be linked to adjustment assistance, which should allow countries to shift resources from affected industries to more advantageous lines of production and thus give some assurance that the emergency “escape clause” restrictions will be temporary. In the context of a liberal commercial policy, the proper role of adjustment assistance is seen as the provision of relief from excessive hardship brought on by increased imports, without unduly hampering the longer-term contraction of industries exposed to import competition.

Past experience with adjustment assistance programs is difficult to appraise, and the relevance of such programs, adopted in different circumstances, to the exigencies of present economic problems is not readily apparent. However, a survey by the oecd in 1975 suggested that such programs had been deficient. It reached four general and tentative conclusions:

  • 1) The displacement effect of imports from developing countries has been minimal when seen in relation to the magnitude of total structural change in industrialised countries.

  • 2) No industrialised countries have so far pursued adjustment assistance policies specifically designed to promote imports from developing countries, although a few attempts have been made to accelerate the contraction of individual sectors.

  • 3) More often, however, public policy has sought to delay the transfer of resources. The greatest contribution to rapid reallocation has probably been the pursuit of full employment and a generally high level of demand.

  • 4) The pursuit of an improved international division of labour is not a matter merely of trade policy and trade-focussed adjustment measures. Developed countries must direct their attention to the whole complex of structural, regional, and employment policies in their countries. If these policies are to promote rather than thwart the expansion of exports from developing countries they must not remain politically and administratively isolated from trade policy.52

Other analyses of structural changes and adjustment assistance programs have shown that, with few exceptions, there have been no concerted or adequate efforts by governments to bring about the required adjustments, and the adjustment that has taken place has been the result of normal market changes and high growth rates. In effect, governments often have used the resources available for adjustment assistance as complicated income-support schemes for ailing industries. While this may have alleviated the financial situation of the respective industries, it has made scant contribution to the underlying problems of adjustment.53

Monetary Disturbances

Another factor that has been suggested as contributing to the rise in protectionism is the disturbed world monetary conditions following the breakdown of the par value system in 1971.54 The general premise is often put forward that during a period of high inflation and fluctuating currencies—such as has existed since early in 1973—the failure of exchange rates to reflect sharply differing rates of inflation adequately leads to pressures for trade measures in order to regain some of the competitiveness lost—or to prevent new external competition—owing to the differential price movements. This, however, does not appear to be a valid explanation for the rise in protectionist pressures during the period under study as far as the major industrial countries are concerned. It appears that, on the whole, since early 1973 changes in exchange rates have tended to offset differences in the rates of inflation among the industrial countries.55

Even in the absence of offsetting movements in exchange rates and prices, however, the emphasis put on fluctuations in exchange rates ignores the fact that the payments imbalance underlying the rate adjustment must result in a similar realignment of competitive positions under either fixed or flexible exchange rates. Changes in exchange rates have an immediate and readily identifiable impact on the competitive position of domestic producers in both local and export markets. Under fixed exchange rates, the readjustment of competitive positions takes place as the payments imbalance, through its effect on domestic liquidity, is reflected in money incomes and in pressures on domestic prices and wages. In short, the adjustment of prices sufficient to generate the reallocation of resources consistent with the new balance of payments equilibrium requires either a more rapid price increase or currency appreciation in the surplus country relative to the deficit country. On the other hand, to the extent that domestic prices and costs are not affected immediately by the payments imbalance, the adjustment of the competitive position of domestic producers is likely to be less rapid under a system of fixed exchange rates.

Available evidence suggests that payments imbalances or fluctuations in exchange rates have not been a major factor in the increasing resort to trade restrictions, at least as far as the major trading nations are concerned. In the period 1971–76, only two major trading countries (the United States in 1971 and Italy in 1974 and 1976), under exceptional circumstances, resorted to trade restrictions for admittedly balance of payments reasons.56 But in the same period several smaller developed countries and many developing countries had recourse to such measures. Details are given in Appendix IX.

  • View in gallery

    Trade Balances of Japan and Developing Countries

    (In billions of U.S. dollars)

  • View in gallery

    Actual Investment Expenditure, Crude Steel Capacity, and Crude Steel Production: Trends in OECD Countries of Europe Since 1960

  • American Iron and Steel Institute, Annual Statistical Report (Washington, 1977).

  • Australia. Industries Assistance Commission, Annual Reports, 1975-76 and 1976-77 (Canberra).

  • Balassa, Bela,Tariff Protection ir Industrial Countries: An Evaluation ,”Journal of Political Economy (Chicago), Vol. 73 (1965), pp. 57394.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Balassa, Bela, and associates, The Structure of Protection in Developing Countries (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins for World Bank, 1971).

  • Baldwin, R., and J. Mutti,Policy Issues in Adjustment Assistance: The United States ,”Prospects for Partnership, Helen Hughes, ed. (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins for World Bank, 1973).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baldwin, Robert E., Nontariff Distortions of International Trade (Washington, Brookings Institution, 1970).

  • Basevi, Giorgio,The United States Tariff Structure: Estimates of Effective Rates of Protection of United States Industries and Industrial Labor ,”Review of Economics and Statistics (Boston), Vol. 42 (1966), pp. 14760.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bergsten, C. Fred,On the Non-Equivalence of Import Quotas and ‘Voluntary’ Export Restraints ,”in Toward a New International Economic Order: Selected Papers of C. Fred Bergsten, 1972-1974 (Lexington, Mass., Heath, 1975).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bhagwati, Jagdish N.,Market Disruption, Export Market Disruption, Compensation and GATT Reform ,”World Development (Oxford), Vol. 4, No. 12 (1976).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bhagwati, Jagdish N., and Padma Desai, India—Planning for Industrialization: Industrialization and Trade Policies Since 1951 (London, 1970).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Blackhurst, Richard, Nicolas Marian, and Jan Tumlir, Trade Liberalization, Protectionism, and Interdependence, GATT Studies in International Trade, No. 5 (Geneva, November 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal, “Inquiry Under Section 16 of the Anti-Dumping Act ,”various reports (Ottawa, documents).

  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal,. Commission du textile et du vêtement, Enquête sur les vêtements: un rapport au Ministre de l’Industrie et du Commerce (Ottawa, May 29, 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal,. Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, Office of Special Import Policy, Background and Historical Development in Textile Imports, 1950-1975 (Ottawa, September 21, 1977, document).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal,. Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, Office of Special Import Policy, “Textiles—Surveillance and Restraint Measures” (Ottawa, 1976, 1977, documents).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal,. Reports of the Textile and Clothing Board to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce pursuant to Section 19 of the Textile and Clothing Board Act (Ottawa).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Canada. Anti-Dumping Tribunal,. Trade and Tariffs Committee, Review of Developments in the GATT Multilateral Trade Negotiations in Geneva (Ottawa, August 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cline, W. R., Noboru Kawanabe, T. O. M. Kronsjö, and Thomas Williams, Trade Negotiations in the Tokyo Round: A Quantitative Assessment (Washington, Brookings Institution, 1978).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Corden, Warner M., and Gerhard Fels, eds., Public Assistance to Industry (London, Macmillan, 1976).

  • Curtis, Thomas B., and John R. Vastine, The Kennedy Round and the Future of American Trade (New York, Praeger, 1971).

  • Curzon, Gerard, Multilateral Commercial Diplomacy (New York, Praeger, 1966, and London, Michael Joseph Ltd., 1965).

  • Dam, Kenneth W., The GATT Law and International Economic Organization (University of Chicago Press, 1970).

  • Denton, Geoffrey, and Seamus O’Cleireacain, Subsidy Issues in International Commerce (London, Trade Policy Research Center, 1972).

  • Donges, Juergen B., Gerhard Fels, and Axel D. Neu, Protektion und Branchen-struktur der westdeutschen Wirtschaft (J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen, 1973).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Europe Documents, Agence Internationale d’Information pour la Presse (Brussels), various issues, including “Rationalization of Shipbuilding Sector in Community,” in No. 979, December 23, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Communities. Bulletin of the European Communities (Brussels), various issues.

  • European Communities. Commission des Communautés Européennes, Assainissement du secteur de la construction navale dans la Communauté (Brussels, December 6, 1977). Partial translation into English in Europe Documents, No. 979, December 23, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Communities. Commission des Communautés Européennes, Mesures de surveillance et de sauvegarde Communautaire (Brussels, July 20, 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Communities. Commission of the European Communities, Exporting to the European Community: Information for Foreign Exporters (Brussels, 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Communities. Commission of the European Communities, Information, No. 131/76.

  • European Communities. Complément d’information sur l’évolution de l’emploi dans l’industrie textile et de l’habillement de la CE and attachments (written reply and documentation provided by EC staff to IMF mission, December 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Communities. Eleventh General Report on the Activities of the European Communities in 1977 (Brussels, 1978).

  • European Communities. European Community Information Service, Commercial Policy of the European Community (Washington, January 1973).

  • European Communities. Official Journal of the European Communities, various issues.

  • Evans, John W., The Kennedy Round in American Trade Policy (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1971).

  • France. Address by Prime Minister of France, Raymond Barre, before National Press Club (Washington), September 16, 1977.

  • France. Address by Prime Minister of France, Barre, Raymond, “Pour une liberté organisée des échanges ,”Journal de Genève, September 15, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • France. Address by Prime Minister of France, Barre, Raymond, Interview with Thierry de Montbrial, Chief, Centre d’Analyse et de Prévision, French Foreign Ministry, in Journal of Commerce (New York), September 15, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • France. Address by Prime Minister of France, Barre, Raymond, Rapport fait au nom de la Commission d’enquête parlementaire chargée d’examiner les conditions dans lesquelles ont lieu des importations “sauvages” de diverses catégories de marchandises, by M. Limouzy, rapporteur (Paris, November 18, 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, A Study on Cotton Textiles (Geneva, July 1966).

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Activities (Geneva), various issues.

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Basic Instruments and Selected Documents, Vol. IV, Text of the General Agreement (Geneva, March 1969).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Basic Instruments and Selected Documents (Geneva), Ninth Supplement, February 1961; Tenth Supplement, March 1962; Eleventh Supplement, March 1963; Fifteenth Supplement, April 1968; Eighteenth Supplement, April 1972; Twenty-First Supplement, February 1975.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, International Trade (Geneva), various issues.

  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Press Releases, No. 1199, November 9, 1977 (address by Olivier Long, Director-General of GATT, to Zürich Economic Society); No. 1208, December 15, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Study on Textiles: Report of the Working Party on Trade in Textiles, L/3797, December 29, 1972. Also, Summary Tables and Basic Statistics, L/3797/Add. 2, December 29, 1972.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Textiles Committee, Production and Trade in Textiles and Clothing, 1974 to 1976: Report by the Secretariat, COM.TEX/W/35, October 29, 1976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Textiles Committee, Report of the Fifth Meeting of the Textiles Committee, COM.TEX/8, March 14, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, Trends in International Trade: A Report by a Panel of Experts (Geneva, October 1958).

  • Glismann, Hans, and Axel Neu,Towards New Agreements on International Trade Liberalization—Methods and Examples of Measuring Nontariff Trade Barriers ,”Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv (Tübingen), Vol. 107 (1971), pp. 23571.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hawkins, Robert G., and Ingo Walter, eds., The United States and International Markets (Lexington, Mass., Heath, 1972).

  • Henner, H.-F., G. Lafay, and B. Lassudrie-Duchêne, La protection effective dans les pays industrialisés (Paris, Economica, 1972).

  • Holzman, Franklyn D.,Comparison of Different Forms of Trade Barriers ,”Review of Economics and Statistics (Cambridge, Mass.), Vol. 51, No. 2, May 1969.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Holzman, Franklyn D.,On the Technique of Comparing Trade Barriers of Products Imported by Capitalist and Communist Nations ,”European Economic Review (Amsterdam), Vol. II, No. 1 (Fall 1970), pp. 322.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hudec, Robert E., The GATT Legal System and World Trade Diplomacy (New York, Praeger, 1975).

  • International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Prospects for Developing Countries, 1978-85, Study by Development Policy Staff (Washington, November 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Labour Office, Bulletin of Labour Statistics (Geneva), 1977 issues.

  • International Labour Office, Year Book of Labour Statistics, 1975-1976, Geneva.

  • International Monetary Fund, Annual Report of the Executive Directors for the Fiscal Year Ended April 30, 1977 (Washington, 1977).

  • International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics (Washington).

  • Jackson, John H., World Trade and the Law of GATT (New York, Bobbs-Merrill, 1969).

  • Jondrow, James M.,Effects of Trade Restrictions on Imports of Steel ,”Professional Paper No. 165 (November 1976), presented at a conference sponsored by the Bureau of International Labor Affairs, December 2-3, 1976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kaldor, Nicholas,The Nemesis of Free Trade ,”Spectator (London), August 27, 1977.

  • Kelly, William B., Studies in United States Commercial Policy (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1963).

  • “L’année économique et sociale, 1977: la langueur,” published by Le Monde (Paris), January 1978.

  • Lowinger, Thomas C,Discrimination in Government Procurement of Foreign Goods in the U.S. and Western Europe ,”Southern Economic Journal (Chapel Hill), Vol. 42 (1975-76), pp. 45160.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lynch, John, Toward an Orderly Market (Tokyo, Sophia University, 1968).

  • MacPhee, Craig R., Restrictions on International Trade in Steel (Lexington, Mass., Heath, 1974).

  • Magee, Stephen P.,The Welfare Effects of Restrictions on U.S. Trade ,”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Arthur Okun and George Perry, eds. (Washington, 1972).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Melvin, James R., and Bruce W. Wilkinson, Effective Protection in the Canadian Economy, Economic Council of Canada, Special Study No. 9 (Ottawa, August 1968).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Metzger, S., Injury and Market Disruption from Imports (Washington, July 1971).

  • Muñoz Durán, Roberto, El Comercio de Carne Bovina de la Comunidad Económica Europea con el Rio de la Plata: Analysis y Reflexiones (Montevideo, August 1976).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Muñoz Duran, Roberto, Perspectiva del Mercado Mundial de Carne Bovina (Montevideo, Central Bank of Uruguay, 1976).

  • New York Times, March 2, 1978 (article entitledU.S. Steel Ending Antidumping Suit Against Japanese”).

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Adjustment for Trade: Studies on Industrial Adjustment Problems and Policies (Paris, 1975).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Footwear Industry (Paris, 1970-1975).

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Meat Balances in OECD Member Countries, 1962-75 (Paris, April 1977).

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Press Release No. A(77)54 (Paris), November 30, 1977.

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Textile Industry, 1975 (Paris).

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, The Iron and Steel Industry … 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, and 1975 (Paris).

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Working Party on Agricultural Policies, Agricultural Policy of the European Economic Community (Paris, 1974).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pestieau, Caroline, and Jacques Henry, Non-Tariff Trade Barriers as a Problem in International Development (Canadian Economic Policy Committee, Private Planning Association of Canada, April 1972).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rieben, Henri, L’Europe sidérurgique au défi I: la bataille de Vacier (Lausanne, 1977).

  • Riedel, James,Tariff Concessions in the Kennedy Round and the Structure of Protection in West Germany: An Econometric Assessment ,”Journal of International Economics (Amsterdam), Vol. 7, No. 2 (1977), pp. 13343.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roningen, Vernon, and Alexander Yeats,Nontariff Distortions of International Trade: Some Preliminary Empirical Evidence ,”Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv (Tübingen), Vol. 112 (1976), pp. 61325.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Soligo, Roland, and Joseph J. Stern,Tariff Protection, Import Substitution and Investment Efficiency ,”Pakistan Development Review (Islamabad), Vol. 5 (1965), pp. 24970.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Economic Survey of Europe in 1960 (Geneva, 1961).

  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Structure and Change in European Industry (New York, 1977).

  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Yearbook of Industrial Statistics, 1975, Vols. I and II (New York, 1977).

  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Yearbook of International Trade Statistics, 1972-73 (New York, 1974).

  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Yearbook of International Trade Statistics, 1975-76, Vol. I, ‘Trade by Country” (New York, 1976).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, Yearbook of International Trade Statistics, 1975-76, Vol. II, “Trade by Commodity” (New York, 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Fourth General Report on the Implementation of the Generalized System of Preferences, TD/B/C.5/53, May 27, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Handbook of International Trade and Development Statistics, 1976 (New York, 1976).

  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Improving the Capability of the Developing Countries to Supply Exports of Manufactures and Semi-Manufactures, TD/B/C.2/178, May 25, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Interdependence of Problems of Trade, Development Finance and the International Monetary System, Trade and Development Board, 17th session, TD/B/665/Add. 1 (Part II), July 25, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, International Trade in Cotton Textiles and the Developing Countries: Problems and Prospects (New York, TD/B/C.2/117/Rev. 1, 1974).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States.Color Television Receiver Imports ,”Presidential Proclamation 4511 and Directive to U.S. Customs Service on Implementation of Orderly Marketing Agreement with Japan, Federal Register (Washington), Vol. 42, No. 123, June 27, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Council on Wage and Price Stability, Report to the President on Prices and Costs in the United States Steel Industry (Washington, October 1977).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment and Earnings (Washington), Vol. 24, No. 12, December 1977.

  • United States. Department of the Treasury, Office of International Trade, “U.S. Import Protection Laws,” “Antidumping Investigations—1970 to Present,” “Countervailing Duty Actions—1969 to Present” (Washington, documents).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Department of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary, “‘Trigger Prices’ for Imported Steel Mill Products ,”News (Washington), January 3, 1978.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Customs Service, “Trigger Price Mechanism: Questions and Answers ,”News (Washington), February 10, 1978.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. International Trade Commission, Annual Reports.

  • United States. International Trade Commission, Reports to the President on various investigations under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. International Trade Commission, The History and Current Status of the Multifiber Arrangement (Washington, January 1978).

  • United States. “Non-Rubber Footwear Imports ,”Presidential Proclamation 4510 and Notice of Orderly Marketing Agreements Between the United States and the Republics of China and Korea, Federal Register (Washington), Vol. 42, No. 122, June 24, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Office of the Special Representative for Trade Negotiations, “Trade Actions Monitoring System Report,” Memorandum (Washington), September 19, 1977.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United States. Trade Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–618).

  • Uruguay. Instituto Nacional de Carnes, Estadísticas, October 1977.

  • Walter, Ingo,Nontariff Barriers and the Export Performance of Developing Economies ,”American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings of Eighty-Third Annual Meeting of American Economic Association, May 1971), pp. 195205.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Walter, Ingo,Nontariff Barriers and the Free-Trade Area Option ,”Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, Quarterly Review (Rome), Vol. 22 (1969).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Walter, Ingo,Non-Tariff Protection Among Industrial Countries: Some Preliminary Evidence ,”Economia Internazionale (Genoa), Vol. 25 (1972), pp. 33554.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation