Explore BrainMass

Explore BrainMass

    Trade liberalization

    Not what you're looking for? Search our solutions OR ask your own Custom question.

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    1. I choose Trade liberalization conflicts with morally-conscious environmental policies. And I am Pro
    Does free trade harm the environment?
    Environmentalists argue that trade liberalization harms the environment. The decisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in particular have been the subject of much criticism. Carbaugh has described environmentalists' three primary assertions (Carbaugh, 2004):
    2. Trade liberalization conflicts with morally-conscious environmental policies.
    Proponents of trade liberalization argue that freer trade might actually improve the quality of the environment. For example, the international environmental policy of the U.S. and other industrial nations is based on the "polluter-pays principle." This approach is intended to give producers the incentive to develop more pollution-control techniques (Carbaugh, 2004).
    In this group project, you will recreate and evaluate the arguments and counter-arguments for all three of the environmentalists' assertions described above.
    Part 1: Recreate the arguments/counter-arguments
    As a group, use the Small Group Discussion Board to recreate the arguments for and against the three assertions noted above (six arguments total). You and your group mates should each choose one of the six arguments and present the argument to the group. (If there are not exactly six members in your group, divide the work as equitably as possible.) Approach this assignment as an exercise in critical thinking; your goal is to represent a party's argument as accurately and as thoroughly as possible. For each argument and counter-argument, present the following information:
    1. The party you represent
    2. Your party's interests or objectives
    3. Your party's assertion
    4. A summary of the available evidence that supports your party's assertion and/or examples that illustrate the assertion.
    Part 2: Summarize and evaluate the arguments/counter-arguments
    As a group, collaborate to write a 4-5 page document in which you:
    1. Summarize each argument and counter-argument. Be sure to note the relevant parties in the debate and their interests/objectives.
    2. Evaluate the arguments and counter-arguments. Be sure to address the following questions:
    Can the conflicting positions in these debates be resolved? If yes, how? If not, why not? Your answer should be well-reasoned and supported with examples.
    BUS610 Unit 4 IP
    As an international economist you have been asked to prepare a short speech which answers the following questions:
    1. How does the Heckscher-Ohlin theory differ from Ricardian theory in explaining international trade patterns?
    2. The Heckscher-Ohlin theory demonstrates how trade affects the distribution of income within trading partners. Explain.
    3. How does the Leontief paradox challenge the overall applicability of the factor-endowment model?
    4. According to Staffan Linder, there are two explanations of international trade patterns-one for manufacturers and another for primary (agricultural) goods. Explain.
    Following that speech, the audience asks you to respond to the following question:
    Describe a specific tariff, an ad valorem tariff, and a compound tariff. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
    Write the text of your speech and your response to the question as a Word document, including APA citations for all sources you use.
    BUS610 Unit 4 DB
    The company you work for is expanding its business and would like to begin to trade with another country.
    Go to 2008 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers for specific country information. The URL for this link is:

    Choose one country for analysis. What type of trade restrictions does this country use? Who will benefit from these restrictions? Who might lose?

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 7, 2023, 5:38 am ad1c9bdddf

    Solution Preview

    //Prior to discussing about the arguments in favor or against the trade liberalization, we will first of all briefly discuss about trade liberalization in order to enhance your learning skills. In this part, we will also go through some positive and negative aspects in concern to trade liberalization. So firstly, we will write about trade liberalization under the heading of Introduction.//

    In today's highly competitive environment, trade liberalization is one of the crucial aspects that should be highly considered. With trade liberalization, it will be easy to make a great contribution in raising productivity and efficiency. Basically, it is liberation of various impositions and government interference from trade between trading partners. On a whole, it is also inferred that free trade gives a lucrative opportunities to trading nations and also leads towards economic prosperity of society.

    On a downside, trade liberalization does not focus on the developing countries' fairness as well as badly affects the marketplace ecology. In this same concern, it is also inferred that free trade or trade liberalization also promotes the relations with unfriendly countries that will affect the economic development in near future (Carbaugh, 2008). Altogether, the given discussion in favor or against the trade liberalization has a sound theoretical base, but it has only limited empirical support.

    //As per directions, this part of paper gives an explanation about favorable and unfavorable arguments in concern to the given Carbaugh primary assertions. You are free to add more in this part.//

    The effectiveness of these assertions can be assessed clearly with the help of a few arguments. In this relation for each particular assertion, there are developed favorable and unfavorable arguments. The arguments in favor of given assertions are as under:


    Trade liberalization removes the restrictions at one aspect, but reorients the environmental standards from the bottom level, which is a very complicated process.
    Trade liberalization flourishes the trade at a great extent, but badly affects the environmental policies of various trading partners.
    Free trade boosts up the consumption level of goods that would endlessly raise the exploitation of environmental resources and thereby lead to global pollution (Cherunilam, 2008).
    In this same concern, the arguments against the given assertions are as under:


    In concern to environmental standards, it reorients standards from bottom level, but at the same time, it also leads to specialization that in turn increases productivity and profitability.
    Basically, trade liberalization promotes the industrialization through giving protection to the infant industry rather than badly affecting the environmental policies.
    Trade liberalization is a measure to make the trades between countries convenient, and does not have any concern with the environmental aspects.
    //As per the instructions, this part of paper summarizes all the given favorable or counter arguments in concern to given assertions. With this given overview, you can easily assess whether trade liberalization affects the environment and its related aspects.//


    The given summary comprises of the brief analysis of the arguments generated in the first part of the discussion paper. This summary would be helpful to gain the overview of the entire discussion in relation to the trade liberalization and its related concepts. In addition to this, the given summary of arguments & counter arguments aids in evaluating whether free trade only expands the trade or raises any other related problems like environmental polices pollution at the global level, etc. The summary of the given favorable arguments reveals out that these arguments are generally political in nature and mainly target to protect the environment issues, nations security and community health. Based on the given arguments, it is stated that trade liberalization is harmful for trading countries if it is not properly executed with certain limitations.

    // In this part, we will summarize each favorable arguments related to trade liberalization given in Part I. In this part, we will also include parties in debate as well as their interest or objectives.//

    The summary of each argument in relation to assertions, which are given in Part I, is as under:

    The first argument in trade liberalization turns the environmental standards from bottom, which is a very complex process that has badly affected the entire trading process. The given assertion in regard to trade liberalization supports the favorable argument as it stimulates the problem of national security preservation and also affects the health of community members (Cherunilam, 2008). In addition to this, it is also stated in the given arguments or assertion that free trade induces the countries to formulate & implement the adjustment polices with the inclusion of economic changes as well as environmental impacts, and this is not an easy task for the trading nations.

    Besides that, trade between enemy or non- friendly countries has also badly affected the environmental standards as it badly affects the economic prosperity. In this concern, I am representing the party that is not favoring the trade liberalization due to some bad effects. The main objective in relation to this objective is to protect the environmental standards. On a whole, it is inferred that trade ...

    Solution Summary

    The response addresses the queries posted in 1891 words with references.