Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:21:29.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Adverse Effects of Technological Innovation under WTO Subsidy Rules

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2019

Matthew Kennedy Open the ORCID record for Matthew Kennedy [Opens in a new window]
Matthew Kennedy*
Affiliation:
University of International Business and Economics, Beijing
*
*Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The WTO concluded in 2012 that subsidized aeronautical research and development (R&D) gave Boeing a head start in product development that caused serious prejudice to the interests of Airbus but later, in 2019, it could not decide how long that head start had lasted. Meanwhile, the WTO concluded in 2018 that launch aid for Airbus aircraft led to innovations that also improved later aircraft models, thereby contributing to serious prejudice to the interests of Boeing. Both conclusions relied on a causation analysis that considered the effects of technological innovation, which makes subsidies used for R&D particularly vulnerable to challenge. This novel analysis may be too broad for the actionable subsidy disciplines of the SCM Agreement.

Keywords

innovationresearch and development (R&D)subsidiesSCM AgreementaircraftAirbusBoeingWTO
Type
Research Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , October 2020 , pp. 511 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Matthew Kennedy 2019

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.)

References

Aggarwal, VK and Evenett, SJ (2010) ‘Financial Crisis, “New” Industrial Policy, and the Bite of Multilateral Trade Rules’, Asian Economic Policy Review 5: 221–244.Google Scholar
Arrow, K (1962) ‘Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention’, in National Bureau for Economic Research’, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, Princeton University Press, pp. 609–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, R and Krugman, P (1988) ‘Industrial Policy and International Competition in Wide-Bodied Jet Aircraft’, in Baldwin, RE (ed.), Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis, University of Chicago Press, pp. 45–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton, JH (1983) ‘Technology Trade’, American Society of International Law Proceedings of the Annual Meeting 77: 130–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, PA and Horlick, (2005) ‘The Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures’, in Macrory, PJ et al. (eds.), The World Trade Organization: Legal, Economic and Political Analysis, Vol. I, Springer, pp. 679–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doane, ML (1995) ‘Green Light Subsidies: Technology Policy in International Trade’, Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 21: 155–179.Google Scholar
Easterbrook, FH (1984) ‘The Limits of Antitrust’, Texas Law Review 63: 1–40.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z (1992) ‘The Search for R&D Spillovers’, Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94 supplement: 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horlick, G and Clarke, PA (2016) ‘Rethinking Subsidy Disciplines for the Future – Policy Options Paper’, ICTSD and World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
Klepper, G (1990) ‘Entry into the Market for Large Transport Aircraft’, European Economic Review 34: 775–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klepper, G (1994) ‘Industrial Policy in the Transport Aircraft Industry’, in Krugman, P. and Smith, A. (eds.), Empirical Studies of Strategic Trade Policy, University of Chicago Press, pp. 101–130.Google Scholar
Lang, JT (1997) ‘European Community Antitrust Law: Innovation Markets and High Technology Industries’, Fordham International Law Journal 20: 717–818.Google Scholar
Manne, GA and Wright, JD (2010) ‘Innovation and the Limits of Antitrust’, Journal of Competition Law & Economics 6: 153–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maskus, K (2015), ‘Research and Development Subsidies: A Need for WTO Disciplines?’, ICTSD and World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
Moulis, D and O'Donnell, B (2000) ‘Does “Withdraw the Subsidy” Mean “Repay the Subsidy”? The implications of the Howe Leather Case for Firms in Receipt of Government Subsidies’, International Trade Law and Regulation 6: 168–173.Google Scholar
Neven, D and Seabright, P (1995) ‘European Industrial Policy: The Airbus Case’, Economic Policy 10: 313–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelanski, HA (2013) ‘Information, Innovation, and Competition Policy for the Internet’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review 161: 1663–1705.Google Scholar
Shelanski, HA and Sidak, JG (2001), ‘Antitrust Divestiture in Network Industries’, University of Chicago Law Review 68: 1–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, R (1957) ‘Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function’, The Review of Economics and Statistics 39: 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, AM (1981) ‘The Learning Curve and Competition’, The Bell Journal of Economics 12: 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, BJ and Brander, JA (1983) ‘International R&D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy’, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 1192, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, JE (1997) ‘Dumping on Free Trade: The Import Trade Laws’, Southern Economic Journal 62: 402–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, AO (2003) ‘The Economics of WTO Rules on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures’, John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 186.Google Scholar
Sykes, AO (2005) ‘Subsidies and Countervailing Measures’, in Macrory, P. J. et al. (eds.), The World Trade Organization: Legal, Economic and Political Analysis, Vol. II (Springer), pp. 83–107.Google Scholar
Sykes, AO (2010) ‘The Questionable Case for Subsidies Regulation: A Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Legal Analysis 2: 473–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) (2006) ‘World Trade Report 2006, Exploring the Links between Subsidies, Trade and the WTO’.Google Scholar