The Intricacies of Firms’ Support for Labor Provisions in US Trade Agreements

Rodrigo Fagundes Cezar

Global Policy, 2022, vol. 13, issue 4, 483-494

Abstract: Do pro‐trade firms want trade agreements to include stronger provisions protecting workers? The position of those firms in the US in recent years is often counterintuitive vis‐à‐vis the expectations of the literature. To solve that puzzle, I argue that it is necessary to account for the intricacies of the position of firms/associations on US trade–labor linkage according to their GVC integration. I argue that highly GVC‐integrated firms/associations fear the uncertainties of strong labor provisions in PTAs and prefer to oppose commitments that could potentially lead to sanctions. However, it can be risky to oppose the inclusion of strong labor provisions in US PTAs. Instead, I argue that highly integrated firms/associations nowadays support trade–labor linkage but attach intricate conditions to that support based on lessons from previous experiences. To probe that argument, I perform a qualitative text analysis of the public submissions of firms/industry associations positioning themselves on the link between trade and labor in US PTAs between 2008 and 2020. The empirical analysis underscores the plausibility of my hypothesis. The results point to subtle ways in which pro‐trade firms may lobby trade–labor linkage. The paper has implications to the design of sustainable development provisions in US PTAs and beyond.

Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13026

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:bla:glopol:v:13:y:2022:i:4:p:483-494

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1758-5880

Access Statistics for this article

Global Policy is currently edited by David Held, Patrick Dunleavy and Eva-Maria Nag

More articles in Global Policy from London School of Economics and Political Science Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().