Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study delves into the trade dynamics of Southeast Asian countries in response to the trade dispute between the United States (US) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Our analysis uncovers diverse patterns of trade diversion effects among eight Southeast Asian countries, revealing significant disparities in their reactions to this trade dispute. Specifically, we observe Viet Nam’s substantial export growth to both the US and the PRC, influenced by geopolitical uncertainties and strategic relocations. Thailand, on the other hand, experiences positive effects on its exports to the US, potentially due to trade diversion, alongside diminishing exports to the PRC. Moreover, we find sector-specific trends, such as an upsurge in machinery exports from Viet Nam, Thailand, and Indonesia. In contrast, Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Singapore largely sustained their respective export levels to the US. Our findings highlight the importance of tailored trade policies that consider each Southeast Asian country’s unique industrial structure and degree of global value chain integration.

In 2019, sales of American agricultural products to China nearly dried up as Beijing retaliated against U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports. We solicited farmers’ perceptions of risks engendered by the trade dispute through a survey of 304 corn and soybean growers in the states of Iowa, Illinois, and Minnesota. We found that farmers’ risk perceptions were affected more by psychometric factors. That is, they expressed fear and dread about the trade war fallout in the perceived absence of credible information regarding government plans of action, updates on trade negotiations, and expert recommendations. Findings point to the value of including farmers’ perspectives to help navigate negotiations regarding future trade disputes.

This study explores the factors influencing the achievement of a mutually agreed solution (MAS) in international trade disputes, drawing insights and patterns from the WTO dispute experience. Through an in-depth examination of prevailing literature and compliance theories, the research pinpoints various factors that impact the achievement of MAS in WTO disputes, including the dynamics of economic size, experience in WTO litigation, reputation as a respondent, and costs in time. The results, obtained through a probit model, reveal the significance of economic size in achieving MAS, where the complainant’s GDP surpasses that of the respondent but not the per capita GDP and trade ratio. Originally, this study discloses that experience in WTO litigation as a disputing party and reputation as the respondent also influence the willingness to settle amicably. While this research primarily centres on the WTO, its findings, derived from WTO data, have broader implications. The identified factors are not only pertinent to WTO members but also hold relevance for solving trade disputes between states. Recognizing these factors is crucial for policymakers across different trade platforms to devise strategies that bolster collaboration and elevate the efficacy of their respective dispute-resolution mechanisms. By illuminating the complexities of the decision-making processes in achieving MAS, this study offers invaluable insights. These insights are instrumental for all stakeholders involved in trade disputes, guiding them towards forging consensus-driven solutions that uphold the principles of just and balanced international trade.

This paper examines the economic implications of the tariff increases by the United States and by China during the Trump era trade dispute and the gains from their potential removal. The increases were dramatic, with the US raising tariffs on industrial products by a factor of six – with particularly large tariff increases on intermediate and capital goods – and China increasing its tariffs on US agricultural products more than five-fold. These changes distort trade and production decisions in both countries and undercut the global trading system. They resulted in substantial economic losses to each country, with import volumes reduced by 4.9% in China and 4.5% in the USA, and bilateral trade patterns were massively distorted. Their cost to the United States rose at the end of 2021, when the import expansion provisions of the Trump era Phase One Agreement expired. Negotiating the abolition of these costly and disruptive tariffs would generate substantial real income gains for both countries and help lower US consumer prices.

A novel graph model with time-varying altitudes is developed to interpret the trade disputes between China and the United States (US) during the period between 2017 and 2019. The implementation of strategies for China and the US was affected by their bilateral relations represented by mutual attitudes changing over time along the evolution of the disputes. The Goldstein scale, a numeral system for studying foreign policies and for describing the fluctuating diplomatic relations affected by historical events, is utilized for eliciting preference relations affected by the time-varying attitudes for the first time. By considering two decision makers (DMs) in the trade disputes, the time varying unilateral improvements (TVUIs) for each DM are initiated based on its judgement which reflects not only the gains or losses for the given DM, but also those for the other DM. In investigating the real-world trade disputes between China and the US, the reasoning of imposing retaliating tariffs for the two countries under time frame is explained. How the fluctuation of time-varying altitudes affects the course of the disputes is also demonstrated. The Phase one agreement legally prohibiting retaliation using tariffs from the two countries was signed when mutual attitude increased by positive interstate events, which eventually ended the tit-for-tat situation. This novel methodology extends the structure of attitudes in graph model by flexibly depicting the fluctuation of mutual attitudes using Goldstein scoring system. Meaningful implications can be provided for DMs to explain how equilibrium can be changed by the time-varying attitudes. In analyzing international disputes in particular, nations can be clearly guided to achieve desired outcomes by making efforts to change bilateral or multilateral relations.

This study investigates the evolutionary mechanisms and equilibrium character-istics of the China–US trade dispute through an improved ecological competition model. By quantifying tariff policies as competition intensity regulators and introducing trade elasticity parameters, we construct a dynamic system that captures the nonlinear feedback between economic rivals. Key findings are as follows. (1) When both nations implement reciprocal tariff measures with similar economic sensitivities, the system converges to a stable equilibrium where bilateral economic outputs stabilize at reduced levels compared to pre-conflict states, provided the product of adjusted competition coefficients remains below critical thresholds. (2) Excessive tariff escalation beyond identifiable tipping points triggers winner-takes-all outcomes, validating the “Thucydides Trap” hypothesis in eco-nomic conflicts. (3) Empirical simulations using 2018–2023 trade data demonstrate that China’s tit-for-tat tariff strategy effectively maintains competitive balance, while domestic market expansion measures (evidenced by a 6.3% average annual growth in China’s do-mestic consumption) significantly mitigate trade diversion effects. The study establishes theoretical connections with optimal tariff theory and strategic trade policy literature while providing policymakers with quantitative tools to assess trade policy impacts. Our find-ings theoretically validate China’s policy combination of calibrated reciprocity and domestic demand stimulation, offering new insights into managing great-power economic competition.

This study combines quantitative content analysis and qualitative discourse analysis to provide a corpus-assisted analysis of Sino-US trade dispute coverage in China Daily, the South China Morning Post and the New York Times. Utilizing software tools such as Leximancer and AntConc, the study provides a tripartite comparison that moves beyond binary US-China media analyses. It examines how these newspapers construct the trade dispute through topics, discursive strategies, and linguistic means, revealing how structural forces rooted in political systems, economic interests, and institutional contexts shape ideological positioning. Findings indicate that China Daily tends to emphasize China’s effort to open up its market and advocate conflict resolution through dialogue. In contrast, the New York Times adopts a critical stance toward China’s trade practices, employing neoliberal discourse to justify protective measures while framing US companies as perceived victims of alleged unfair policies. The South China Morning Post occupies a unique “third space”, filtering coverage through a globalist lens that prioritizes international system stability and multinational business interests. These approaches demonstrate how media outlets position themselves within global information flows, with implications for public media literacy, international communication strategies, and diplomatic dialogue amid global economic tensions.

This research explores the relationship between journalistic attitudes and the state identity of China Global Television Network (CGTN). It undertakes a corpus-assisted study of the linguistic representation of Affect, Judgment, and Appreciation in the trade dispute coverage of CGTN and the US media outlets at two levels: (1) prosody and social actors; (2) the preference for appraisal relations. It shows that CGTN manifests its state identity in attitudinal officialization and harmonization. Highlighting collectiveness in the choice of news agendas, actors, and prosody, CGTN prioritizes the appraiser's role of the group mind when expressing journalistic attitudes and is more inclined to draw on Judgment to stress the moral basis. A survey of journalistic attitudes in CGTN's trade dispute coverage enables us to elaborate on how the Chinese state media constructs its identity in news discourse.

Purpose Through empirical analysis of Sino-US solar photovoltaic (PV) trade, this paper aims to evaluate the complementarity of Sino-US solar PV trade by adopting trade combination degree (TCD) index, export similarity index (SI) and trade complementarity index (TCI). It also explores the role of trade disputes over Sino-US solar PV trade between China and the USA and important factors affecting the complementarity of the trade. Design/methodology/approach Based on the comparative advantage theory, this paper selects the TCD, export SI and TCI to evaluate the complementarity of Sino-US solar PV trade comprehensively. Among them, TCD and SI can directly reflect the degree of cooperation and competition of Sino-US solar PV trade. Finally, the authors further analyze the decisive factors affecting the complementarity of Sino-US PV trade by entropy weight method and multiple linear regression analysis on the influencing factors of TCI. Findings The solar PV trade between China and the USA still has a close relationship, and there is solar PV trade cooperation and competition between the two countries. The factors affecting the complementarity of Sino-US solar PV trade are mainly exchange rate levels rather than trade disputes between China and the USA. The solar PV trade policies of China and the USA will have a great negative impact on the global supply chain of solar PV products. The major solar PV products in China and the USA have a clear division in the global supply chain and still have a strong trade complementarity. Originality/value This paper conducts an empirical analysis of the Sino-US solar PV trade rather than a policy discussion. This research has important practical significance for the healthy and sustainable development of solar PV trade for both countries. It can also provide references to the current trade disputes between China and the USA in a broader sense.

What drives consumer activism during trade disputes? We investigate this important and timely question using a survey experiment in the context of the recent Canada–US trade dispute. We find that Canadians are more likely to express willingness to take punitive actions in the form of boycotting during a trade conflict when they learn that Americans are taking such actions (retaliation), when many fellow citizens are taking such actions (peer pressure), and when they are rallied by their government (elite cue). Among the three conditions, peer pressure has the largest effect. These findings contribute to our understanding of the microfoundations of consumer activism during international trade disputes. They also have important policy implications in a world where both protectionism and populism are rising.