Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:44:58.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inclusive Trade: Justice, Innovation, or More of the Same?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2021

Patricia Goff
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inclusive trade is taking hold in various forms in international organizations and in the trade policy of national governments. Absent empirical evidence that will take time to generate, it can be difficult to assess the achievements of this new approach to trade. Nancy Fraser's three justice idioms provide a conceptual entry point for evaluating the potential of the inclusive trade agenda. Fraser argues that the contemporary global justice conversation must acknowledge claims for recognition, representation, and redistribution. Applying this conceptualization to the inclusive trade agenda shows that trade agreement provisions intended to favor women and Indigenous peoples go some distance in addressing claims for recognition and representation but accomplish less in remedying injustices associated with maldistribution. Therefore, the inclusive trade agenda does significantly advance global justice for marginalized groups, but works primarily in ways that are political and cultural, not economic.

Keywords

international tradeinclusive tradeglobal justicefree trade agreementstrade and gendertrade and Indigenous peoplesNancy Fraserrecognition
Type
Features
Information
Ethics & International Affairs , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , Summer 2021 , pp. 273 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Versions of this paper were presented at the Balsillie School of International Affairs in Waterloo, Canada, in April 2019 and at Sorbonne Université in Paris in November 2019. I wish to thank participants of these two events. I would also like to thank Hirra Gilani and Brianna Puigmarti for excellent research assistance.

References

NOTES

1 Rodrik, Dani, “What Do Trade Agreements Really Do?,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 32, no. 2 (Spring 2018), pp. 73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For another effort to gauge the impact of inclusive trade measures, see Erin Hannah, Adrienne Roberts, and Silke Trommer, “Gender in Global Trade: Transforming or Reproducing Trade Orthodoxy?,” Review of International Political Economy (2021), www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09692290.2021.1915846.

3 Fraser, Nancy, “Rethinking Recognition,” New Left Review 3, no. 3 (May/June 2000), pp. 107–20Google Scholar; Fraser, Nancy, “Recognition without Ethics?,” Theory, Culture and Society 18, nos. 2–3 (June 2001), pp. 21–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fraser, Nancy, “Introduction: Scales of Justice, the Balance and the Map,” in Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009), pp. 1–11Google Scholar; Nancy Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” chap. 2 in Fraser, Scales of Justice, pp. 12–29; and Nancy Fraser, “Abnormal Justice,” chap. 4 in Fraser, Scales of Justice, pp. 48–75. Fraser, Nancy, “Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics,” in Fraser, Nancy and Honneth, Axel, Redistribution or Recognition: A Political-Philosophical Exchange (New York: Verso Press, 2003), pp. 7–109Google Scholar.

4 World Trade Organization, World Trade Report 2016: Levelling the Trading Field for SMEs (Geneva: WTO, 2016).

5 European Commission, Trade for All: Towards a More Responsible Trade and Investment Policy (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2015), trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/october/tradoc_153846.pdf.

6 Alasdair R. Young, “Two Wrongs Make a Right? The Politicization of Trade Policy and European Trade Strategy,” Journal of European Public Policy 26, no. 12 (2019), pp. 1883–99.

7 For example, during negotiations for the United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement, the conservative opposition characterized Justin Trudeau's inclusive trade agenda as “virtue-signaling” and implored him to focus on traditional trade deal concerns, like market access and job creation. On the other hand, Laura MacDonald and Nadia Ibrahim called the USMCA “a missed opportunity for gender equality,” entrenching an old model rather than innovating a new one. See Laura Macdonald and Nadia Ibrahim, “The New NAFTA Is a Missed Opportunity for Gender Equality,” Monitor, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, January 23, 2019, monitormag.ca/articles/the-new-nafta-is-a-missed-opportunity-for-gender-equality. See also Diane Elson and Marzia Fontana, “When it Comes to Gender Analysis, Modern Trade Agreements Are Lacking,” Centre for International Governance Innovation, April 4, 2018, www.cigionline.org/articles/when-it-comes-gender-analysis-modern-trade-agreements-are-lacking/.

8 For another effort to conceptualize inclusion, see Jean-Baptiste Velut, Gabriel Siles-Brügge, and Louise Dalingwater, “Rethinking the Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion in Trade Politics,” New Political Economy (February 5, 2021), pp. 1–6.

9 I will leave issues and processes aside for now. In my judgment, the Fraser framework is best suited to analyzing the justice-related consequences for groups.

10 Justin Trudeau, “Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on National Aboriginal Day” (statement, Ottawa, June 21, 2017), Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau, pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2017/06/21/statement-prime-minister-canada-national-aboriginal-day.

11 Biggs, Margaret, “Inclusive Trade, Inclusive Development: Opportunities for Canadian Leadership,” in Tapp, Stephen, Van Assche, Ari, and Wolfe, Robert, eds., Redesigning Canadian Trade Policies for New Global Realities (Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 2016)Google Scholar; Grinspun, Ricardo and Shamsie, Yasmine, eds., Whose Canada? Continental Integration, Fortress North America, and the Corporate Agenda (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Araujo, Billy Melo, “Labour Provisions in EU and US Mega-Regional Trade Agreements: Rhetoric and Reality,” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 67, no. 1 (January 2018), pp. 233–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Wilkinson, Rorden, “Labour and Trade-Related Regulation: Beyond the Trade-Labour Standards Debate?,” British Journal of Politics & International Relations 1, no. 2 (June 1999), pp. 165–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Khan, M. Ali, “Free Trade and the Environment,” Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 5, no. 2 (1996), pp. 113–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bucher, Hanna, Drake-Brockman, Jane, Kasterine, Alexander, and Sugathan, Mahesh, Trade in Environmental Goods and Services: Opportunities and Challenges (Geneva: International Trade Centre, September 17, 2014)Google Scholar; Charnovitz, Steve, “The NAFTA Environmental Side Agreement: Implications for Environmental Cooperation, Trade Policy, and American Treatymaking,” Temple International and Comparative Law Journal 8, no. 2 (Fall 1994), pp. 257–314Google Scholar; Clapp, Jennifer and Dauvergne, Peter, Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy of the Global Environment (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Anca D. Cristea, David Hummels, Laura Puzzello, and Misak G. Avetisyan, “Trade and the Greenhouse Gas Emissions from International Freight Transport” (Working Paper 17117, National Bureau of Economic Research, June 2011), www.nber.org/papers/w17117; Robyn Eckersley, “The Big Chill: The WTO and Multilateral Environmental Agreements,” Global Environmental Politics 4, no. 2 (May 2004), pp. 24–50; Sikina Jinnah, “Overlap Management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat Influence on Trade-Environment Politics,” Global Environmental Politics 10, no. 2 (May 2010), pp. 54–79; Avidan Kent and Vyoma Jha, “Keeping up with the Changing Climate: The WTO's Evolutive Approach in Response to the Trade and Climate Conundrum,” Journal of World Investment & Trade 15, nos. 1–2 (April 2014), pp. 245–71; and Joanna I. Lewis, “The Rise of Renewable Energy Protectionism: Emerging Trade Conflicts and Implications for Low Carbon Development,” Global Environmental Politics 14, no. 4 (November 2014), pp. 10–35.

13 Chios Carmody, Frank J. Garcia, and John Linarelli, eds., Global Justice and International Economic Law (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2012); James Christensen, Trade Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018); Simon Cotton, “Globalisation and Distributive Justice: Evaluating the Moral Implications of Coercion and Cooperation in World Trade,” Australian Journal of Political Science 49, no. 2 (May 2014), pp. 363–75; Helena de Bres, “Risse on Justice in Trade,” Ethics & International Affairs 28, no. 4 (Winter 2014), pp. 489–99; Aaron James, Fairness in Practice: A Social Contract for a Global Economy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012); Pietro Maffettone, “The WTO and the Limits of Distributive Justice,” Philosophy & Social Criticism 35, no. 3 (March 2009), pp. 243–67; Mathias Risse and Gabriel Wollner, On Trade Justice: A Philosophical Plea for a Global New Deal (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019); Christian Neuhäuser, “Being Realistic about International Trade Justice,” Moral Philosophy and Politics 5, no. 2 (2018), pp. 181–204; Oisin Suttle, “Equality in Global Commerce: Towards a Political Theory of International Economic Law,” European Journal of International Law 25, no. 4 (November 2014), pp. 1043–70; and Oisin Suttle, Distributive Justice and World Trade Law: A Political Theory of International Trade Regulation (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2018).

14 Gavin Fridell, Fair Trade Coffee: The Prospects and Pitfalls of Market-Driven Social Justice (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007); and Daniel Jaffee, Brewing Justice: Fair Trade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival (Oakland: University of California Press, 2014).

15 Jörg Broschek and Patricia Goff, eds., The Multilevel Politics of Trade (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2020).

16 Robert Driskill, “Deconstructing the Argument for Free Trade: A Case Study of the Role of Economists in Policy Debates,” Economics & Philosophy 28, no. 1 (March 2012), pp. 1–30; Dani Rodrik, Has Globalization Gone Too Far? (Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics, 1997); and Dani Rodrik, The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy (New York: W.W. Norton, 2010).

17 David H. Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson, “The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade,” Annual Review of Economics 8, no. 1 (October 2016), pp. 205–40.

18 For more on conflating “trade” with “trade agreements,” see Rodrik, “What Do Trade Agreements Really Do?”

19 Fraser, “Introduction,” p. 4. See also Franziska Boehme, Lindsay Burt, Patricia Goff, and Audie Klotz, “Cultural Diversity and the Politics of Recognition in International Organizations,” Journal of International Organizations Studies 9, no. 2 (2018), pp. 117–32.

20 Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” p. 14.

21 Fraser, “Introduction,” p. 5.

22 Ibid., p. 2.

23 Ibid., p. 3.

24 Ibid.

25 Ibid.

26 Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” p. 16.

27 Fraser, “Abnormal Justice,” p. 58.

28 Fraser, “Rethinking Recognition,” p. 113.

29 Ibid., p. 114.

30 Ibid., p. 115.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid.

33 Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” p. 17.

34 Ibid., p. 18

35 Ibid., p. 17.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid., p. 18.

38 Ibid., p. 17.

39 Ibid., p. 18.

40 Fraser, “Abnormal Justice,” p. 59.

41 Fraser, “Social Justice in the Age of Identity Politics,” p. 36.

42 Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” p. 16.

43 Fraser, “Abnormal Justice,” p. 60.

44 Ibid.

45 Ibid.

46 Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” p. 28.

47 Leonardo Baccini, Andreas Dür, and Manfred Elsig, “The Politics of Trade Agreement Design: Revisiting the Depth–Flexibility Nexus,” International Studies Quarterly 59, no. 4 (December 2015), pp. 765–75; Patricia M. Goff, “Limits to Deep Integration: Canada between the EU and the US,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 30, nos. 5–6 (2018), pp. 549–66; Soo Yeon Kim, “Deep Integration and Regional Trade Agreements,” in Lisa L. Martin, ed., The Oxford Handbook of the Political Economy of International Trade (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), pp. 360–79; Aaditya Mattoo, Nadia Rocha, and Michele Ruta, “The Evolution of Deep Trade Agreements” (Policy Research Working Paper No. 9283, World Bank, 2020), openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/33944; and Alasdair R. Young, “The Politics of Deep Integration,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 30, nos. 5–6 (2017), pp. 453–63.

48 “Canada's Inclusive Approach to Trade,” Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/campaign-campagne/inclusive_trade/index.aspx?lang=eng.

49 For instance, the Canadian government conducted an LGBTQ trade mission from 2018 to 2019.

50 For an excellent overview of the range of issues at stake in the trade and gender conversation, see Erin Hannah, Adrienne Roberts, and Silke Trommer, Gendering Global Trade Governance through Canada-UK Trade Relations (Manchester: University of Manchester, 2018).

51 As the Empower Women website points out, in Canada “women own 16 percent of all small- and medium-sized enterprises in Canada, and only 11 percent of such women-owned enterprises are active outside Canada” (“Roundtable Discussion: Women and Trade in the Context of CETA,” Empower Women, July 18, 2019, www.empowerwomen.org/en/community/events-opportunities/2019/07/women-and-trade-in-the-context-of-ceta-roundtable-discussion). See also World Bank and World Trade Organization, Women and Trade: The Role of Trade in Promoting Gender Equality (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2020).

52 See “Text of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement—Table of Contents” (CETA entered into force provisionally on September 21, 2017), Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ceta-aecg/text-texte/toc-tdm.aspx?lang=eng.

53 Chrystia Freeland, “Address by Foreign Affairs Minister on the modernization of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)” (speech, Ottawa, August 14, 2017), www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2017/08/address_by_foreignaffairsministeronthemodernizationofthenorthame.html.

54 “Recommendation 002/2018 of 26 September 2018 of the CETA Joint Committee on Trade and Gender,” Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ceta-aecg/rec-002.aspx?lang=eng.

55 “Comprehensive Trade Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership: Text and Resources” (CPTPP entered into force on December 30, 2018), New Zealand Foreign Affairs & Trade, www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Trade-agreements/TPP/Annexes-ENGLISH/15-A.-Canada-Government-Procurement-Annex.pdf.

56 “Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada 7/1/20 Text,” (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, entered into force July 1, 2020), Office of the United States Trade Representative, ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/united-states-mexico-canada-agreement.

57 Chapter 23, Article 23.9, “Discrimination in the Workplace,” in “Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.”

58 Chapter 25, Article 25.2, “Cooperation to Increase Trade and Investment Opportunities for SMEs,” in ibid.

59 Macdonald and Ibrahim, “The New NAFTA Is a Missed Opportunity for Gender Equality.”

60 “Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement” (entered into force July 5, 1997), Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/chile-chili/fta-ale/index.aspx?lang=en&_ga=2.16565558.1620792502.1622124517-534472863.1622124517.

61 “Amendments to the CCFTA,” in ibid. (entered into force on February 5, 2019), Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/chile-chili/index.aspx?lang=eng#a2.

62 “Will the modernized CCFTA still apply once Chile ratifies the CPTPP?” in “Frequently Asked Questions: Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement,” Government of Canada, international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/chile-chili/CCFTA-faq.aspx?lang=eng.

63 “Appendix II—Chapter N bis—Trade and Gender,” in “Amendments to the CCFTA.”

64 “Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement” (entered into force January 1, 1997), Government of Canada, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/fta-ale/text-texte/toc-tdm.aspx?lang=eng&_ga=2.46476327.1620792502.1622124517-534472863.1622124517.

65 “Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement: Timeline,” Government of Canada, international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/timeline.aspx?lang=eng.

66 “Preamble,” in “Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement.”

67 Chapter 13, Article 13.6(2), “Dispute Settlement,” in ibid.

68 Chapter 12, Annex 12.9(i), in ibid.

69 Chapter 16, Article 16.4, “Corporate Social Responsibility,” in ibid.

70 Chrystia Freeland, quoted in Barb Nahwegahbow, “Indigenous Interests Must Be Part of International Trade Discussions,” Windspeaker 34, no. 13 (2016), pp. 1–2, at p. 1.

71 For more on indigenous contributions to the softwood lumber debate, see Patricia M. Goff, “Bringing Indigenous Goals and Concerns into the Progressive Trade Agenda,” Revue interventions économiques 65 (2021), pp. 1–20; Christopher Kukucha, “Lawyers, Trees and Money: British Columbia Forest Policy and the Convergence of International and Domestic Trade Considerations,” Canadian Public Administration 48, no. 4 (December 2005), pp. 506–27; Arthur Manuel and Nicole Schabus, “Indigenous Peoples at the Margin of the Global Economy: A Violation of International Human Rights and International Trade Law,” Chapman Law Review 8, no. 1 (2005), pp. 222–52; and Sean Robertson, “Natives Making Space: The Softwood Lumber Dispute and the Legal Geographies of Indigenous Property Rights,” Geoforum 61 (May 2015), pp. 138–47.

72 Brenda L. Gunn, “Impacts of the North American Free Trade Agreement on Indigenous Peoples and Their Interests,” Balayi: Culture, Law and Colonialism 9 (2006), pp. 5–25.

73 Gregory Shaffer and David Pabian, “European Communities—Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products,” American Journal of International Law 109, no. 1 (January 2015), pp. 154–61.

74 Article 14, “Preferences for Canada's Aboriginal Peoples,” in “Joint Interpretative Instrument on the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada & the European Union and Its Member States,” Government of Canada, October 30, 2016, www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ceta-aecg/jii-iic.aspx?lang=eng.

75 Risa Schwartz, Toward a Trade and Indigenous Peoples’ Chapter in a Modernized NAFTA, CIGI Paper No. 144 (Waterloo, Ontario: Centre for International Governance Innovation, 2017), p. 13.

76 Annex 19-7, Article 2.a, in “Text of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement.”

77 Chapter 20, “Environment,” Article 20.1, in “Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

78 Annex 15-A, “Canada,” section G, Article 3(b), in ibid.

79 Perry Bellegarde, “By Including Indigenous Peoples, the USMCA Breaks New Ground,” Maclean's, October 4, 2018.

80 “Preamble” in “Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.”

81 Chapter 32, “Exceptions and General Provisions,” Article 32.5, “Indigenous Peoples Rights,” in ibid.

82 Bellegarde, “By Including Indigenous Peoples, the USMCA Breaks New Ground.”

83 Chapter 24, “Environment,” Article 24.2(4), “Scope and Objectives,” in “Agreement between the United States of America, the United Mexican States, and Canada.”

84 Chapter 24, Article 24.15(3), “Trade and Biodiversity,” in ibid.

85 Chapter 24, Article 24.19(2), “Conservation of Marine Species,” in ibid.

86 See, for example, “Submission by the International Inter-Tribal Trade and Investment Organization to the Government of Canada for the Renegotiation and Modernization of the North American Free Trade Agreement,” International Inter-Tribal Trade and Investment Organization (July 16, 2017), para. 10, iitio.org/nafta/.

87 Leonardo Baccini, Andreas Dür, and Yoram Z. Haftel, “Imitation and Innovation in International Governance: The Diffusion of Trade Agreement Design,” in Andreas Dür and Manfred Elsig, eds., Trade Cooperation: The Purpose, Design and Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 167–94.

88 It is worth noting that some provisions in trade agreements do not specifically name groups like women or Indigenous peoples but benefit them all the same. For example, measures to help small- and medium-sized enterprises are not necessarily explicitly designed to help women, but statistics show that the vast majority of women-owned businesses are SMEs. Similarly, efforts to modify controversial ISDS provisions during CETA and USMCA negotiations were not responding specifically to indigenous demands. However, Indigenous peoples have perennially opposed ISDS provisions that threaten their rights. See United Nations General Assembly, “Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on the Impact of International Investment and Free Trade on the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” A/70/301, August 7, 2015.

89 Bellegarde, “By Including Indigenous Peoples, the USMCA Breaks New Ground.”

90 Interestingly, in her discussion of feminism, Fraser suggests that the three elements of justice have been pursued sequentially, with redistribution emphasized in earlier periods, and recognition and representation emphasized later on.