å¼ãç¶ããããªãã¯ã®ã¤ã³ã¿ãã¥ã¼è¨äºããã昨日エントリã§ã¯ãããªãã¯ã®WTOæ¹å¤ãç´¹ä»ããããTPPã«ãçå ãåãã¦ããã
Judis: So we are get down to nitty-gritty Letâs go back to the three steps for rebalancing trade agreements and to American trade policy. Do you think Trump was right to abandon TPP?
Rodrik: Yes.
Judis:. There are a lot of people who thought it was a good idea on geopolitical if not economic grounds. It was a way to strengthen Americaâs position in Asia against that of China.
Rodrik: I think many people thought the economics was unimportant and that geopolitically it was a way of getting Asia to play by American rules and counterbalancing China and so forth. Whether that is good or not, whether that made sense or not from geopolitical standpoint, I think it is crazy to have a trade agreements which is extremely contentious politically and which contains a lot of elements that are highly problematic and use it for geopolitical reasons. If you want to achieve a geopolitical agreement not an economic agreement, do that. I think it was very dishonest and very inappropriate.
On the economics, it is another instance of a trade agreement that would have produced aggregate gains that were really miniscule. The best that the most pro-TPP economists could produce was an estimate that it would increase US GDP 0.4 percent after 10 years. And that included all kinds of assumptions of how employment would not be affected and workers would move to new jobs and new opportunities and so forth, stuff we know from earlier that we doesnât happen, Even in the best circumstances, the overall gains were miniscule.
Then it had really problematic elements. The one I find the most problematic in these new trade agreements is the ISDS, the investor state dispute settlement, which is an abomination. [The TPP would have established independent tribunals that corporations could use to file suit to overturn national regulations.] I think it is a derogation of domestic legal standards and it undermines the integrity of a domestic regulatory and judicial system.
ï¼æ訳ï¼
- ã¤ã³ã¿ãã¥ã¢ã¼
- æ¬é¡ã«æ»ãã¾ãã¦ã貿æåå®ããªãã©ã³ã¹ããããã®3段éã¨ç±³å½ã®è²¿ææ¿çã«è©±ãæ»ãã¾ãããããã©ã³ããTPPãç ´æ£ããã®ã¯æ£ããã£ãã¨æããã¾ããï¼
- ãããªãã¯
- ã¯ãã
- ã¤ã³ã¿ãã¥ã¢ã¼
- çµæ¸å¦çã«ã¯ã¨ãããå°æ¿å¦çã«ã¯TPPã¯è¯ãã¢ã¤ãã£ã¢ã ã£ããã¨èãã¦ãã人ãå¤ããã¾ããä¸å½ã«å¯¾æãã¦ã¢ã¸ã¢ã§ç±³å½ã®å°ä½ãå¼·åããä¸ã¤ã®æ¹æ³ã ã£ããã¨ã
- ãããªãã¯
- çµæ¸å¦ã¯éè¦ã§ã¯ãªããå°æ¿å¦çã«ã¢ã¸ã¢ãç±³å½ã®ã«ã¼ã«ã«å¾ã£ã¦ãã¬ã¤ãããä¸ã¤ã®æ¹æ³ã§ãããä¸å½ã«å¯¾æããäºã ã¨ãããã¨ãå¤ãã®äººãèãã¦ããã¨æãã¾ãããããè¯ããæªããããããå°æ¿å¦çãªè¦³ç¹ããåççãªå¦ãã«é¢ããããæ¿æ²»çã«é常ãªè°è«ãå¼ãã§ãã¦ã極ãã¦åé¡å«ã¿ã®è¦ç´ ãæ°å¤ãæ±ãã貿æåå®ããå°æ¿å¦çãªçç±ã§å©ç¨ãããã¨ããã®ã¯çæ°ã®æ²æ±°ã ã¨ç§ã¯æãã¾ããçµæ¸åå®ã§ã¯ãªãå°æ¿å¦çãªåå®ãçµã³ãããã°ãããããã°è¯ãã®ã§ããé常ã«ä¸èª å®ã§ä¸é©åãªããæ¹ã ã£ããã¨ç§ã¯æãã¾ãã
çµæ¸å¦çã«è¨ãã°ãTPPã¯ãããããåè¨å©å¾ã極ãã¦å°ãã貿æåå®ã®ããä¸ã¤ã®ä¾ã§ãããTPPæ¨é²æ´¾ã®å¤§åã®çµæ¸å¦è ãåºããæåã®æ¨å®ã¯ã10å¹´å¾ã®ç±³å½ã®GDPã0.4%æ¼ãä¸ãããã¨ãããã®ã§ããããããããã¯ãéç¨ã¯å½±é¿ãåãããå´åè ãæ°ããè·ã«å°±ããæ°ããæ©ä¼ãæã«ããããªã©ã¨ãã£ããããã¾ã§ã®çµé¨ããçããªããã¨ãåãã£ã¦ãããããã¨ããããä»®å®ãå«ãã ãã®ã ã£ãã®ã§ããæåã®ç°å¢ã«ããã¦ãããå ¨ä½çãªå©å¾ã¯å°ããªãã®ãã¨ããããã§ãã
ãã®ä¸TPPã«ã¯ãæ¬å½ã«åé¡ãããè¦ç´ ãå«ã¾ãã¦ãã¾ãããããã®æ°åå®ã§ç§ãæãåé¡ã ã¨æãã®ã¯ãISDSãæè³å®¶å¯¾å½å®¶ã®ç´äºè§£æ±º*1ã§ããããã¯éæªãªãã®ã§ããï¼»TPPã§ã¯ãå½å è¦å¶ãå¼ã£ç¹°ãè¿ãããã®è¨´è¨ã«ä¼æ¥ãå©ç¨ã§ããç¬ç«ããè£å¤æ©é¢ã®è¨ç½®ãäºå®ãã¦ãããï¼½ããã¯å½å ã®æ³çåºæºã®æ¨©å¨ã失å¢ããããã®ã§ãããå½å ã®è¦å¶ãè£å¤ã®ä½ç³»ã®å ¨ä½æ§ãæãªããã®ã ãã¨ç§ã¯æãã¾ãã
*1:cf. 投資家対国家の紛争解決 - Wikipediaã