I am somewhat of a skeptic on giving tariff preferences to developing countries, because my instinct is that discrimination in trade relations is bad and should generally be avoided. But with GSP programs, the goal is development and the means is lowering tariffs, and I can see how there would be benefits here, so I am least not opposed to these programs, even if I'm not fully supportive. There may be better ways to promote development, but GSP is a real world program that exists now, and we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
On the other hand, I am deeply skeptical of conditionality in GSP and other preference programs. As far as I know, it is only the U.S. and the EU that impose policy-based conditions in order for developing countries to access tariff preference programs. I think it is a big mistake that they do so, as it can undermine the development benefits. There are various policy goals that have been pursued through conditionality: stronger IP protection, investor protections, fighting the illegal drug trade, and worker rights, to name a few. In my view, regardless of the specific policy goal, tying it to something meant to be a development program is problematic. Yes, you can argue that your policy goal is in some way crucial for development. But keep in mind that you might not like the other person's policy goal, and at some point the political winds will mean that the other policy goal will be the one pursued. If conditionality exists in principle, sometimes it will be used for policies you like, and sometimes it will be used for policies you don't like.
There is talk right now in the U.S. about expanding the scope of conditionality to cover additional policies, such as gender rights. Let me be clear: Promoting gender rights is a good policy goal! But I'm not sure GSP conditionality is the right way to do it.
With all this in mind, it has felt to me like the Trump administration was pushing conditionality more than past administrations, perhaps as a way to promote particular policy goals or perhaps just to have an excuse to raise tariffs. So, when Cornell law prof Chantal Thomas asked me if I had any suggestions for topics that students in her Law and Development seminar could write about, I said, yes, I think I have a good one! Based on my suggestion, as part of that seminar, Cornell law student Josh Coker wrote a paper in which he explored the Trump administration's policies and practice relating to GSP and GSP conditionality. I thought it was a good paper and that others might want to see it as well, so I'm posting it here. Enjoy!
