From the abstract from a new report by Robert Wolfe:
Leaders of the G20 promised repeatedly that they would refrain from trade restrictions in response to the global financial crisis that began in 2008, and that they would minimize the negative impact on trade and investment of stimulus measures. They also promised to hold themselves accountable for this commitment using a novel transparency mechanism based in the World Trade Organization. At the same time, the Global Trade Alert set itself up as an alternative accountability mechanism. A detailed comparison first of GTA and WTO data on the number of measures each found, and second, of their ability to offer robust interpretations of the measures, allows both a check on the official story, and a consideration of how transparency can help to close the gap between commitment and action, thereby contributing to accountable global governance.
And from the conclusion:
The curious incident of the protectionist dog not barking during the financial crisis is worthy of reflection. The great collapse of trade was not due to any failings of the trading system. We can be excited by the protectionist whimpers that were heard, but the amount of trade affected, in relation to actual trade flows, was trivial. The protectionist virus, the social and economic factors that create pressures to favour “us” at the expense of “them,” are always present, but fears that the endemic virus would be unleashed in a pandemic have been overblown—so far.
As the WSJ reports, though, there may still be more crisis-related protectionism to come:
April 1 marked the start of a new financial quarter, and with it a whole new trade headache for the Obama Administration. Five new requests for antidumping duties were filed in only two days at the end of March by U.S. producers seeking protection from imports. More petitions are likely to follow, ironically enough because the economy has been improving.
The new petitions cover products ranging from steel nails from the United Arab Emirates to high-end refrigerators from South Korea. Three of the five—steel tires, steel wire and special brightening dyes—ask for duties against China in combination with other countries such as Taiwan and Mexico. All of these products allegedly have been sold to Americans at a price that's less than the cost of production. Several cases ask for antisubsidy duties, too.
The sudden uptick in such cases after a lull (only three were filed in all of 2010) is a result of the economic recovery. To win its case, an American company has to convince the U.S. International Trade Commission it has been "materially injured" by unfair import competition. That's hard to prove during a recession when most companies suffer slack sales. But filing a case now means that the three-year review period ITC examines will include both a period of poor sales at the end of the last recession plus enough of the recovery to undermine a defense argument that the pain was due mostly to the recession itself.
