ORALS

SESSION: LawsTueAM-R4	Nolan International Symposium (2nd Intl Symp on Laws & their Applications for Sustainable Development)
Tue. 29 Nov. 2022 / Room: Arcadia 3
Session Chairs: Malcolm McNeil; Session Monitor: TBA

11:30: [LawsTueAM01] OS Plenary
Sustainability and Free Trade: What is the right Path?
Mathew Nolan¹ ; ¹ARENTFOX SCHIFF LLP, Washington, United States;
Paper Id: 454 [Abstract]

On its face, free trade would appear to foster sustainable development as free trade optimizes the use of limited resources for the greatest gains in overall social welfare. The picture, however, is far more complicated. Free trade can be disruptive to local economies, by disturbing existing industries and employment in sectors that face foreign competition. As countries develop new more efficient industries they challenge existing industries and cause disruption in those markets. In addition, national governments have basic obligations to provide food, jobs, maintain health and a clean environment, and promote local industries which may conflict with free trade principles as they may choose protect threatened industries or reduce trade in products for other reasons like climate change. The discussion of free and fair trade often enters the lexicon, as well as the need to protect local agriculture and industry so a country can feed and employ its people. Some countries abuse trade by subsidizing industries they wish to promote as export platforms and thereby distorting resource allocations. Of course “fair trade” is also sometimes misused as a tool to shield local industry from foreign competition. WTO rules designed to correct predatory pricing like antidumping, countervailing duty, and safeguards regimes may be abused as a backdoor means of permitting protectionist policies to limit trade. In some cases the balance of political forces requires forms of “managed” trade in sensitive sectors. Finally, while regional trade agreements promote trade, the trade is limited to those inside the free trade arrangement. These issues have come to define in part the “antiglobalization” movement and the trend toward “onshoring” production of critical industries. In this session we will explore these issues and ask the question: what is the right balance for countries to promote free trade while ensuring sustainability in the local economy?

References:
“The Case for Free Trade”, CATO Institute May 2, 2019
“Globalization in transition: The future of trade and value chains”, McKinsey& Company 2019
“Trade and Globalization”, the World Bank
“Fair Trade, the Challenges of transforming globalization”, Edited by Laura Raynolds, Douglas L. Murray, and John Wilkinson, Routledge, 2007

SESSION: LawsTuePM1-R4	Nolan International Symposium (2nd Intl Symp on Laws & their Applications for Sustainable Development)
Tue. 29 Nov. 2022 / Room: Arcadia 3
Session Chairs: Daniel Shanley; Session Monitor: TBA

14:00: [LawsTuePM105] OS Plenary
International Bribery and Corruption, Impacts on Sustainability and International Commerce
Mathew Nolan¹ ; ¹ARENTFOX SCHIFF LLP, Washington, United States;
Paper Id: 455 [Abstract]

Much has been written over the past decades on the deleterious effects bribery and corruption have on economic development and sustainability. . It comes by many names: bribery, kickbacks, grease, soborno, baksheesh, rusvet, mordida, just to name a few. But regardless of the moniker, the impact is usually the same. Whether it concerns provision of basic public services like electricity, public health, or water, to lost revenue from tax dodgers, to individual firms getting preference on sales or service contracts, bribery often acts as a deadweight loss to social welfare and inhibits growth and often sustainability goals. Even humanitarian aid is not immune. But it is part of the fabric of many countries, despite laws enacted and aggressive international efforts to combat it. In some countries it is viewed as necessary to “get things done” when dealing with underpaid public servants, or as a way to facilitate otherwise valid transactions. But when does a transaction cross over from “facilitating” to “debilitating” for an economy, and do such payments ever really advance sustainability objectives? And, are current laws effective in combatting corruption or is more work needed to maximize growth prospects for developing and developed economies? We will examine these questions and consider impacts of corruption, current anticorruption efforts and the realities of the current global environment.

References:
“Is corruption efficiency-enhancing? A case study on nine Central and Eastern European countries”, E. Gamberoni, C. Gartner, C. Giordano and P. Lopez Garcia,Europena Central Bank Working Paper Series No. 1950, August 2016

“Why corruption matters:understanding causes effects and how to address them”, UK AID Deprtment of International Development January 2015

Issue Paper on Corruption and Economic Growth”, OECD Issues Paper, 2013 G20 Leaders Summit, St. Petersburg, Russia

International Corruption, Paul Cohen and Arthur Marriott QC, 2010

“Corruption and Inefficiency: Theory and Evidence from Electric Utilities”, Ernesto Dal Bo and Martin A. Rossi, Journal of Public Economics, June 2007.

Good Intentions Corrupted: The Oil- for-Food Scandal and the Threat to the U.N., Jeffrey Mayer and Mark Califano, 2006.