Trade21: What’s All This, Then?
Because an “About” page only goes so far.
Since we launched Trade21 a few short months ago, the response has been fantastic. From first acquaintances to longtime colleagues, and from government to industry to civil society and all points in between, we’ve gotten a wealth of feedback. Many of them have urged us to give priority to a particular issue or constituency. Many others have expressed interest in working together. But I’d say the most common theme has been a desire simply to know more about us. What were our original motivations in starting the program? What niche are we seeking to occupy? What substantive areas will be our principal focus in the medium and longer term?
Lest I give the impression that all the answers are below: No, I won’t even try to cover all of that territory in a single stroke. I would point out that now we’ve flipped the switch here on our own little corner of the web, we’ll be able to address these and many other questions in rich detail in the coming months. (Don’t worry, we’ll keep the pure navel-gazing to an absolute minimum.) And I’m of course always happy to go into the weeds with those who want to take up a specific topic. For now, I thought I’d just speak a bit more to the big picture.
Why Trade21, and why now?
Trade has long been about more than narrowly defined economic outcomes. The modern global economy is different. Its impact has a new breadth and depth. Much of that impact has been, and will continue to be, for the good. Trade and globalization have helped bring greater prosperity to billions of people, drive key technological innovations, and empower individuals worldwide to express themselves and communicate with one another.
But we must be equally clear-eyed in seeing the downsides. People have lost jobs. Entire towns have died out. The environment has suffered. These and other consequences — however far outpaced they might be by the benefits, on balance — have been far more focused and acutely felt.
There are other, deeper tensions as well. Cross-border investment regimes, ownership structures, and production processes have grown so complex that sometimes no one — certainly no single government — can see more than a few select pieces of the larger whole. The traditional model for regulation of the economy, and for a social compact with the public, was forged under very different circumstances. It’s fraying fast.
Add to this mix a lackluster global macroeconomic record since 2008–2009, and we can start to better appreciate the anxieties that underlie much of the resistance to measures like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Globalization is under intense scrutiny. The perils of further economic dislocation, risks to consumer health and safety, potential “capture” of the public space by elite interests more generally — these are legitimate concerns that deserve not only to be met with earnest debate, but accommodated as part of a common path forward.
On both ends of the political spectrum, there are small but very vocal segments not interested in helping to shape that path. In some cases, they’re actively trying to block it. Here’s the thing: Standing in place is not a viable option, neither in the long term nor in the short term. Again, the traditional model is fraying fast, and the fundamental characteristics of globalization are here to stay. We must look forward. And in the grand scheme, we’re really just beginning to do that — to confront the reforms needed at the national and international levels to realign a robust global economy with the public interest agenda.
This is the imperative at the heart of Trade21, and it’s what has brought Bill, Eric, and I together here and now.
Our approach
We’ve positioned Trade21 to make a difference in several distinct ways. At the macro level, we want to help (re-)establish a sorely needed common frame of reference for discussing trade and globalization. At a more granular level, we want to advance regulatory strategies and institutional formulas that better address today’s complex trade agenda and that accommodate a more diverse set of players.
In plain and practical terms, that translates to a combination of thinking, communicating, and doing. We conduct original research, engage a wide range of media, and convene public and closed-door events with leaders from industry, U.S. and international government agencies, Capitol Hill, and civil society. We’re also supporting decision makers across these domains in more targeted assessments and implementations of regulatory approaches, business models, and institutional frameworks.
In all of this work, we start from a place of humility. With such a sweeping and dynamic set of issues, there’s no alternative. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom. To the contrary, there’s a need to take stock of more viewpoints, and there’s lots of room for legitimate disagreement. (You might even see the latter within our own team from time to time!) That’s why the valuable post-launch feedback I noted above is actually just the latest chapter in a much longer conversation. I’ve spent much of the past 18 months calling on experts and practitioners, both in Washington and far beyond, to learn and to solicit advice. That conversation continues.
In all of this work, we start from a place of humility.
We’re also truly fortunate to have a superb group of colleagues at Stimson. They bring a crucial set of complementary expertise, both regionally and functionally oriented, enabling us to take an all-angles view on complex issues. Last but not least, we have a growing network of partners that cuts across many of the fault lines that often have frustrated meaningful progress in recent years.
With this approach and these ingredients, we can ensure our programming blends deep knowledge of the global economic and public policy landscape with wide-ranging stakeholder relationships. We can ensure relevance and impact.
Some select areas of interest
Where are we starting? Let me highlight a few important themes that are threaded throughout what I’ve already discussed.
The digital economy
The digital domain is foundational to the modern global economy — and increasingly, to modern society. At the same time, it has triggered a number of political, legal, institutional, and technical challenges. Many more surely lie ahead. We’re most accustomed to hearing about these challenges in one of two contexts: security or privacy. Likewise, policy prescriptions and engagement with decision makers and practitioners have focused on these two areas. What’s still needed is a careful, consistent look at how trade and investment regimes are woven into both the challenges and potential solutions. Trade21 is supporting short-term and long-term efforts to mature the digital economy in a way that promotes innovation and private sector competitiveness, as well as other core public interests.
Competitiveness in a complex global regulatory environment
In a bid to keep pace with the speed and scope of global value chains, government and civil society actors are seeking to promote various objectives — from border security to labor rights — through a patchwork of new formal and informal regimes. These range from evolved tactics in economic sanctions programs to the “responsible business conduct” agenda for corporate due diligence on human rights. The intent in each case may be laudable. But the net effect is an ever-more complex and multi-layered regulatory environment in which companies face rising economic, legal, and reputational risks — and the public interest benefit is often limited. Trade21 is helping develop business processes and due diligence practices through which industry can meet the important aims of regulators and civil society without sacrificing economic competitiveness.
The rules-based trade and investment system
The World Trade Organization faces fundamental questions about its ability to successfully conclude multilateral negotiations. Countries are turning elsewhere to pursue an array of regional and “plurilateral” agreements that break new substantive ground — and signal major geopolitical shifts. TPP, TTIP, and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) are prime examples. A crucial test for the WTO is at hand as it tries to craft a new work program in time for its December 2017 ministerial in Argentina. Even if it is successful in doing so, its place in a rules-based system is likely to continue drifting from the central role that was envisioned for it two decades ago. Trade21 is exploring how countries can move forward with next-generation trade and investment deals while recalibrating the WTO’s role to preserve the crucial functions of a wider systemic architecture.
As we pursue these and other discrete areas, we’re keeping our sights on the larger goal: a 21st-century model of economic governance, where global trade and investment thrive alongside the public interest. Getting there will be a monumental enterprise, demanding contributions from many quarters. We’re committed to doing our part.
