Protectionist Executives

R. Urbatsch

International Interactions, 2016, vol. 42, issue 5, 729-749

Abstract: The trade policy literature long presumed that legislatures favor relatively more protectionist policies than executives do, but more recent studies have found little evidence to support the idea. This article clarifies these mixed results with a simple formal model. It finds that legislative protectionism requires very specific circumstances involving the combination of universalistic legislative norms and a particular economic geography, with trade policy interests large relative to legislative districts but small compared to countries. Empirical evidence on this latter point suggests that the necessary spatial patterning is likely to have diminished in many countries since the 1930s, when the Smoot-Hawley Tariff and the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act focused attention on institutional differences. The assumption of legislative protectionism based on theories and measures of that era thus may not hold today, and widespread presumptions about institutional preferences may accordingly be uncomfortably fragile.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03050629.2016.1140452 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:ginixx:v:42:y:2016:i:5:p:729-749

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/GINI20

DOI: 10.1080/03050629.2016.1140452

Access Statistics for this article

International Interactions is currently edited by Michael Colaresi and Gerald Schneider

More articles in International Interactions from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().