Regulating Global Trade and Finance: Influencing Australian Trade Policy, Shaping Public Policy Debates and Informing Practitioner Agendas
Submitting Institution
University of WarwickUnit of Assessment
Politics and International StudiesSummary Impact Type
EconomicResearch Subject Area(s)
Studies In Human Society: Political Science
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
Trade and finance are the lifeblood of the global economy. Research
conducted within the International Political Economy (IPE) cluster has
tracked changes in how trade and finance are governed. This case study
demonstrates the impact of the IPE cluster on a range of beneficiaries
including national governments, international organisations and
non-governmental organisations. Via the £4.3M ESRC-funded Centre for the
Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation (CSGR), members of the IPE
cluster have influenced national economic policies, shaped policy debates
on international regulatory regimes and informed the attempts of non-state
actors to raise ethical standards in transnational corporate practices.
Underpinning research
There are inevitable ethical and policy trade-offs inherent in
international cooperation to regulate global trade and finance. The
underpinning research of this case study showcases work undertaken within
IPE at Warwick over the past two decades that has identified tensions
within and proposed practical initiatives to resolve such trade-offs. This
research has focused on both top-down approaches to international
regulatory regimes and bottom-up policy reforms driven through
private-sector governance initiatives, presenting the possibility of new
policy tools designed to produce more equitable outcomes in trade and
finance sectors when viewed globally.
To act as a bridge between academics, policy experts, and end-user
communities, PAIS staff pioneered the concept of the `Warwick Commission',
which has attracted substantial University funding since 2007. Warwick
Commissions are charged with carrying out independent analysis of a
seemingly intractable problem with the goal of making practical and
realistic recommendations for policy-makers: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/research/warwickcommission/.
The First Warwick Commission (2007-8), entitled `The Multilateral Trade
Regime: Which Way Forward?', took evidence from a wide range of experts
including politicians, trade practitioners, academics, key representative
business organisations and civil society actors with an interest in the
world trading system. The programme of research, directed by Professor
Higgott and assisted by an ESRC Impact Grant (RES-172-25-0055), lasted for
one year and led to a final Report, which was launched at the World Trade
Organization (WTO) in Geneva in December 2007. The Report argued that to
make the WTO `fit for purpose' key reforms should centre on redefining the
organisation's objectives and functions. In particular, these reforms
should aim to realign the WTO's responsibilities and governance procedures
in order to provide more equal benefits to its weaker member states.
Additionally, such reforms would enable the momentum behind the
proliferation of preferential trading agreements to be channelled towards
mutual policy goals that could benefit all countries, such as
non-discrimination between trading partners and greater transparency in
international commercial relationships.
The principal conclusions of the Second Warwick Commission (2009) on
`International Financial Reform' challenged conventional wisdom in
transnational policy communities and global governance scholarship that
effective international cooperation necessarily involves a transfer of
policy responsibilities from the national to regional or global levels.
This Report, directed by Professor Seabrooke, identified counter-cyclical
economic policies and macro-prudential regulatory frameworks as vital
tools to combat the sources of financial instability, the conflicts of
interest facing both private banking institutions and financial regulators
and the unsustainable asset bubbles that fuelled the conditions for the
various phases of the global financial crisis in 2007, 2008 and 2009. It
highlighted the problems associated with attempts to impose a
`one-size-fits-all' set of reforms to global financial governance that
would centralise responsibility for financial stability and regulation in
global institutions, which could magnify existing problems of `regulatory
capture'. Policy recommendations emphasised the importance of host country
regulation to govern both domestic and foreign banks operating in
particular jurisdictions.
Whereas the two Warwick Commissions focused on `high-level' engagement
with policy-makers connected to international institutions and national
governments, Dr Richardson has worked with practitioners to propose
changes in the way that transnational corporations treat their workers and
farmers. This is of particular importance given the expansion of sugar
production in the context of rising food prices and the use of sugar cane
to make biofuel. Richardson's research has addressed the use of non-state
governance initiatives, recommending that the `sustainable certification'
of sugar producers would be more effective if they were integrated with
existing regulatory authorities rather than duplicating tasks. It also
suggests that more emphasis is required on securing the livelihoods of the
rural poor, since the mechanisation of sugar production is leading to
large numbers of redundancies. Thus, the `Aid for Trade' initiatives
launched by international donors need to be used for social transfers as
well as promoting economic competitiveness.
References to the research
1. R. Higgott and H. Weber (2005) `GATS in Context: Development, an
Evolving Lex Mercatoria and the Doha Agenda', Review of
International Political Economy, 12(3) pp. 434-55. [2012 impact
factor: 1.661]. Peer-reviewed journal article.
2. R. Higgott et al (2007) `The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way
Forward', University of Warwick. Peer-reviewed Report of the First Warwick
Commission.
3. L. Seabrooke et al (2009) `International Financial Reform: In Praise
of Unlevel Playing Fields', University of Warwick. Peer-reviewed Report of
the Second Warwick Commission.
4. L. Seabrooke, (2010) `What Do I Get? The Everyday Politics of
Expectations and the Subprime Crisis', New Political Economy, 15
(1) pp. 49-68. [2012 impact factor: 1.930]. Peer-reviewed journal
article.
5. B. Richardson (2009) Sugar: Refined Power in a Global Regime
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan). Peer-reviewed research monograph.
6. B. Richardson (2010) `Big Sugar in Southern Africa: Rural Development
and the Perverted Potential of Sugar/Ethanol Exports', Journal of
Peasant Studies, 37 (4), pp. 917-938. [2012 impact factor:
5.805]. Peer-reviewed journal article.
Associated grants:
1. ESRC Resource Centre Grant (M555285001, £1,987,057.01) Centre for the
Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, PI: Professor Richard Higgott,
1 October 1997-30 September, 2002.
2. ESRC Research Grant (RES-555-28-5001, £2,328,375.65), Centre for the
Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, PI: Professor Richard Higgott,
1 October 2002-30 September 2007.
3. ESRC Research Grant (RES-555-28-5003, £199,037.15), CSGR-GARNET
Network, PI: Professor Richard Higgott, 1 July 2005-31 December, 2007.
4. ESRC Research Grant (RES-172-25-0055, £50,050.00), `The Future of the
World Trade System after Doha: Enhancing Interaction between the Business
and Trade Policy Communities', PI: Professor Richard Higgott, 1 November
2007-30 November 2008.
5. ESRC Research Grant (PTA-026-27-2467, £75,088.20), `The Global
Political Economy of Sugar', PI: Dr Ben Richardson, 1 October 2009-30
September 2010.
6. Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellowship (ECF/2010/0518, £50,342),
`Social Justice in the Sugar Cane Industry', PI: Dr Ben Richardson, 1
October 2010-30 September 2012.
Details of the impact
The underpinning research listed above has achieved impact since 2008 via
the uptake of the Warwick Commissions and the work of CSGR across three
main contexts: 1) influencing Australian trade policy; 2) shaping public
policy debates about global trade and financial regulation; and 3)
informing practitioner agendas.
Influencing Australian trade policy
The Report of the First Warwick Commission energised national and
international public policy debates about the future of global trade
governance in the WTO in the wake of the failure of the Doha Round
negotiations (sources 1, 2, 3 and 5). Since 2008 it has become a reference
point in national and international policy discussions: 3,500 printed
copies of the Report were distributed internationally; and over 2,500 PDF
versions have been downloaded from the website. In September 2008 a review
of trade policy by the Australian Government adopted the Commission's
Recommendations. The Mortimer Report, entitled Winning in World
Markets: Review of Export Policies and Programs, acknowledged the
salience of the Commission's analysis and was particularly supportive of
the proposal that `critical mass' decision-making should be considered in
order to speed up negotiations at the WTO. The Mortimer Report also
supported the Commission's recommendation that the WTO's temporary
Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements be made permanent. In
2008 Higgott gave briefings to senior Australian trade officials and
politicians in Canberra. The Minister for Trade subsequently wrote about
the work of the Warwick Commission as follows: "The Warwick Commission's
Report is timely and I applaud the Commission's contribution to the
debate. I appreciate the work the Warwick Commission has undertaken in
seeking to strengthen the multilateral trading system" (source 1).
Shaping public policy debates about global trade and financial
regulation
The First Warwick Commission was widely recognised as an authority on the
question of global policy making in the context of UK public policy
debates (source 4). On 3 June 2008 Higgott gave evidence to the House of
Lords European Sub-Committee A (Economic and Financial Affairs and
International Trade) Inquiry into EU Trade Policy (source 2). The
Committee's Report, entitled `Developments in EU Trade Policy' (London:
HMSO, 5 December 2008) endorses "[...] the Warwick Commission's
recommendation in favour of the introduction of `critical mass' voting at
the WTO as a reform which would speed up decision-making and
agenda-setting at the WTO". Furthermore, one Member of Sub-Committee A,
said: "May I congratulate you on this Report [...] Warwick has invented a
marvellous process for linking academics [...] and the policy world. So
much good social science work goes on in universities and it never gets
near the policy world [...] This is a marvellous model [...] you had the
WTO on your Commission [...] It is terrific". A further indication of the
impact of the First Warwick Commission is that the Report won Gold at the
2008 Chartered Institute of Public Relations Pride Awards for the best
campaign designed to inform public policy (source 5).
The impact strategy of the Second Warwick Commission led by Seabrooke was
to target high-level international media outlets in order to stimulate
wider public debate about financial regulation as the crisis unfolded
(sources 6 and 7). A key recommendation of the Report—that an unlevel
playing field should be implemented through a combination of host country
regulation and macroprudential regulation based on types of risk rather
than the overall stores of safe capital— informed and shaped international
media responses. This included features in The Economist, Handelsblatt,
The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal (source 7).
The elite of the world financial press reported on the Commission's
findings, including a feature article in The Economist comparing
the report with regulatory proposals from the Bank of England: "Although
there is wide agreement that macroprudential policy is needed to limit
systemic risk, there has been very little detail about how it might work.
Two new reports help fill this gap. One is a discussion paper from the
Bank of England, which sketches out the elements of a macroprudential
regime and identifies what needs to be decided before it is put into
practice. The other paper, by the Warwick Commission, a group of academics
and experts on finance from around the world, advocates specific reforms"
(source 6).
Richardson's findings on the EU's `Aid for Trade' initiative in the sugar
industry were published with a prominent Brussels-based think-tank called
the European Centre for Development Policy Management in two separate
forms. A longer discussion paper and a shorter comment piece were
circulated through its Weekly Compass newsletter and GREAT Insights
magazine to a wide range of analysts and commentators interested in
Euro-African affairs. This research also informed media coverage of the
issue in The Guardian newspaper, The Swaziland Times and
formed the basis of his work with Traidcraft on their advocacy work around
Aid for Trade policy (source 9).
Informing practitioner agendas
Richardson's work informed and fed directly into an influential Report by
the Nuffield Council on Bioethics on biofuels, which called for mandatory
certification of all biofuel imports into the European Union (source 8).
This was later passed into legislation and Richardson is now working as an
academic consultant with Bonsucro, one of the world's biggest agricultural
certification schemes. Bonsucro is composed of companies and civil society
actors that collectively agree on a sustainability standard against which
members are audited. A testimonial obtained from the Head of
Sustainability, demonstrates that Richardson's work has fed directly into
the formulation and revision of Bonsucro's policy documentation (source
10). Among others, the Bonsucro standard has been adopted by the Brazilian
sugar industry and major downstream buyers like BP and Shell. Richardson
represented Bonsucro at the 2011 ISEAL Alliance conference and has also
been appointed to the five-person committee reviewing this standard, which
is due to deliver its findings by the end of 2013. The standard already
covers 2.5% of the global sugarcane area (over 500,000 hectares) and is
expanding quickly, providing an opportunity to improve the terms on which
workers, farmers and peasants engage with the industry.
Sources to corroborate the impact
Evidence for impact on Australian trade policy:
-
`Australia's Role in Addressing the Future of the Multilateral
Trading System', speech delivered on 8 April 2008 by former
Australian Minister of Trade praising the work of the First Warwick
Commission and stressing the importance of its findings for Australian
trade policy. Available on request and online: http://bit.ly/1cB3a2S
Evidence for impact on public policy debates:
-
House of Lords European Union Sub-Committee A. This source
recognises the significance of the Report and congratulates Professor
Higgott in the House of Lords European Union Committee Report, Developments
in EU Trade Policy (p.90). Available on request and online: http://bit.ly/16k5hn1
-
Panel on the Future of US Trade Negotiations. Citation of the
Recommendations of the First Warwick Commission in evidence presented to
the Committee on Ways and Means in the US House of Representatives (29
February 2012). Demonstrates on-going impact of the Report (p.9).
Available on request and online: http://bit.ly/1d1ES4J
-
Member of Parliament for Harrow West. The source can testify to
the impact of the Report of the First Warwick Commission on influencing
UK policy debates about the future of multilateralism.
-
Gold Award, Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR). In
2008 The First Warwick Commission achieved 1st place in the
`Public Affairs' category of the prestigious CIPR Pride Awards. The
award recognises research-based campaigns that have been designed to
inform the public policy agenda.
-
The Economist explicitly acknowledges the Second Warwick
Commission Report as a source of inspiration for its own Special Report
on Financial Risk, published in February 2010. Available on request and
online: http://bit.ly/16TuYP9
-
Handelsblatt, `Wenn die Banken selbst die Fäden ziehen',
26 November 2011. Evidence of the Second Warwick Commission informing
and shaping international media responses to the financial crisis.
Available on request and online: http://bit.ly/17xA5kw
Evidence for impact on practitioner agendas:
-
Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The Council and the Working
Party thank Richardson for "invaluable advice and input" in their Report
on ethical issues of biofuels (p.v). Available on request and online: http://bit.ly/1atgH96
-
Traidcraft. On request the source can confirm the assistance
provided by Richardson in their advocacy work on `Aid for Trade' policy
and citation of his work in their briefing to Members of the European
Parliament.
-
Head of Sustainability, Bonsucro. In his testimonial (available
on request), the source confirms that Richardson has enhanced Bonsucro's
understanding of "the social conditions of workers in sugarcane fields",
"the organisation of unions", and "international conventions". The
source acknowledges that Richardson's research has led to amendments of
Bonsucro's policies and refers to him as a "great asset to our
organisation".