Suchergebnisse

Of all the countries in Latin America, Mexico has the strongest economic ties to the United States, formalized by the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, but this Agreement does not preclude Mexico from targeting the United States in the World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Mechanism. In fact, the Agreement's dispute‐settlement system encourages it to do so if the complaint at hand is to have a fair consideration. The North American Free Trade Agreement's dispute‐resolution system goes to a board containing representatives from the three‐member countries, which includes by default the complainant state and the defendant state. Therefore, even though Mexico has the closest economic relationship with the United States of the Latin American states considered in this project, it is also the most likely to target the United States in the World Trade Organization. This article focuses on how trade ties constrain Mexico's use of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism against its largest trade partner.

The relocation of Diageo's rum production facility from Puerto Rico to the U.S. Virgin Islands in 2010 had larger ramifications than the shifting of jobs from one island to another. Related to this move is the distribution of monies associated with the excise tax placed on each bottle of rum produced in these territories. For close to five decades, Puerto Rico received a large majority of these funds and invested them in economic growth. To secure a larger share of the cover‐over money, the U.S. Virgin Islands promised large corporate kickbacks funded by the tax. This article examines which strategy has an effect on economic growth, the cover‐over as a supplemental fund or as an enticement to multinational corporations. It concludes that the use of the cover‐over as a supplement to island growth is ineffective and that constrained growth on the islands is due to their political status as territories of the United States.

AbstractObjectivesIn this article, we examine whether former President Trump utilized Twitter to craft a narrative regarding international trade via his use of Twitter.MethodsWe examine Trump's language choices in a corpus of his tweets to compare his tone in trade‐related tweets against his more general tweets during his presidency.ResultsWe find that Trump's trade tweets contain language that is more cognitively complex, masculine, and honest, compared to his non‐trade‐focused tweets.ConclusionThis study illustrates Trump's ability to craft and maintain a narrative about trade based on exaggeration and manipulations, in line with populist leadership theory.

ABSTRACTHas the global COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted the scholarly productivity of academics? Do gender and parenting magnify its effect? To obtain insight into the changes the pandemic has wrought in the lives and careers of women and parents in academia, we surveyed scholars in political science and international studies. The survey was in the field during the period in which many academics were experiencing shelter-at-home orders and adjusting to a new reality. It captures initial reactions to changed circumstances as well as the fears and anticipated consequences of the disruptions. We find that perceptions of a negative impact are broadly shared. The open-ended responses suggest that the pandemic may widen the gender and parent productivity gaps. Although further analysis is needed to better understand the effect of the pandemic on scholarly productivity, we conclude that the pandemic exacerbates existing structural inequalities.

AbstractThe onset of the COVID-19 pandemic increased uncertainty, leading to questions about how it spread, how long it would last, and its long-term effects. In academia, many scholars worried about their positions and career advancement. Our research focuses on how different groups within academia coped during the initial period of the pandemic, with particular attention paid to the role of anxiety. We argue that vulnerable groups, such as historically excluded individuals, graduate students, and women, felt even higher levels of anxiety. We use original survey data collected from international relations and political science scholars during May 2020. We content analyze open-ended responses to illustrate the impacts of the pandemic on our participants' work life, including research productivity, the job market, promotion, and tenure. These analyses reveal not only what different groups of scholars are concerned about, but also the different ways in which they discuss the pandemic. Our research aims to highlight the social and mental health effects of the pandemic, with an eye toward addressing inequalities in academia.