On Trade Agreements and a Social Reproduction Approach to GVCs: A Reply to Donatella Alessandrini

Abstract

Abstract The 15 years following the 2008–2009 global financial crisis witnessed increasing questioning in the global North of the distribution of the gains and costs of an open world economy and the multilateral rules-based trade order. Difficulties in (re-)negotiating trade agreements in the World Trade Organization led states to shift even more of their focus to reciprocal and bilateral trade agreements as these internalize benefits among partners by continuing to maintain trade barriers against non-signatories (mostly emerging economies). There is a vigorous debate across academic disciplines whether such agreements help to increase participation in global value chains (GVCs) by signatory nations and the magnitude and incidence of the associated economic, social and environmental impacts – positive or negative. These are questions calling for rigorous empirical research that assesses impacts against appropriate baselines and counterfactuals and investment in data collection, monitoring and evaluation by participating governments. Mischaracterizing both the extent to which trade agreements constrain the ability of states to regulate and reports published by international organizations on GVCs and trade agreements detracts from where the focus arguably should be: providing compelling empirical evidence that GVCs and trade agreements detrimentally affect social reproduction and specific suggestions on how the design of trade agreements should be changed to improve outcomes.