Number of results to display per page
Search Results
422. Fair Trade Coffee Enthusiasts Should Confront Reality
- Author:
- Jeremy Weber
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- From university cafeterias to supermarkets in the developed world, people are buying Fair Trade (FT) coffee certified by the FLO-Cert, the certifying entity of Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO). The assumption is that such purchases will contribute to the welfare of marginalized producers in the developing world. While sales of FT coffee in Europe have stabilized, the North American and Japanese markets are growing rapidly. Total sales increased 40 percent from 2004 to 2005, to a total volume of 33,992 metric tons (MT) (FTO 2005). What is “Fair Trade”? According to FINE, the umbrella organization that comprises the four largest Fair Trade organizations (FLO, International Federation for Alternative Trade, Network of European World Shops, and the European Fair Trade Association), Fair Trade is a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, that seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers—especially in the South [FINE 2001]. The FINE definition optimistically assumes that the trading partnerships and conditions promoted by Fair Trade necessarily “contribute to sustainable development.” It is true that the Fair Trade coffee system—the producers, exporters, importers, and retailers operating by the rules and standards of FLO—has improved living standards for many participating coffee growers (Bacon 2005, Raynolds 2004). Yet the system faces vexing issues such as a disconnect between promotional materials and reality, excess supply, and the marginalization of economically disadvantaged producers and groups. Those involved in Fair Trade coffee debates and governance must address these issues if Fair Trade is to be an effective mechanism for rural development in coffee producing regions.
- Topic:
- Development, Economy, Trade, Coffee, and Fair Trade
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
423. The Columbian Exchange and the Reversal of Fortune
- Author:
- Thomas Grennes
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- It is difficult to think about modern American food without including hamburgers and hotdogs. It is also difficult to think about popular American history without cowboys mounted on horseback tending herds of cattle. However, before the arrival of Columbus in 1492 there were no cattle or pigs in America to provide beef and pork for hamburgers and hotdogs. There was no wheat to make hamburger and hotdog buns. There were no horses for cowboys or Indians to ride. The European settlers brought with them cattle, pigs, horses, wheat, and many other plants and animals that became the foundation for modern food and agriculture in the Western Hemisphere. It is also difficult to think about modern Mexican food without including rice, tacos filled with meat, refried beans in animal fat, cheese in enchiladas, and sugar, cinnamon, and milk in chocolate. However, Mexico in 1492 had none of these ingredients. The massive transplantation of plants and animals across the Atlantic Ocean in both directions has been called the Columbian Exchange (Crosby 1972). It has been described as the “greatest human intervention in nature since the invention of agriculture (Fernandez-Armesto 2002: 165), and it has had an enormous effect on the Americas and the entire world. The Columbian Exchange altered the kind of food Americans and Mexicans eat, the kind of agricultural products produced in both countries, and the entire pattern of world economic growth. This article will concentrate on the effects of the Columbian Exchange, but the exchange of plants and animals was part of a broader process of trade, migration, investment, colonization, and exchange of ideas that followed the voyages of discovery by Columbus and others. The same Old World plants and animals were introduced to the two regions that would become the United States and Mexico, but the effects in the two countries were substantially different.1 The United States was the poorer neighbor in 1492, but it became relatively richer. The purpose of this article is to show how differences in institutional development affected responses to the same opportunities. I shall concentrate on developments in the United States and Mexico, but the Canadian experience was similar to the U.S. response, and the response in the rest of Latin America was similar to the Mexican response (Cole et al. 2005).
- Topic:
- Migration, History, Food, Investment, Trade, and Columbian Exchange
- Political Geography:
- North America, Mexico, and United States of America
424. Remuneration vs. Reelection: A Senatorial Balancing Act
- Author:
- Jim F. Couch, Brett A. King, and Taylor P. Stevenson
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Unique events often give rise to other unique events. Such was the case of Hurricane Katrina—the costliest and most destructive natural disaster in U.S. history. The resulting casualties and staggering damage estimates from the savage storm in late August 2005, led the U.S. Senate to vote overwhelmingly (92 to 6) against a Senate pay raise. Most senators apparently felt that voters would not look kindly on a Senate pay raise given the devastation caused by Katrina. The Senate vote was largely symbolic because the House of Representatives was not going to take a vote on rescinding a pay raise for members of Congress. Thus, senators voting against the raise knew their votes would resonate well with voters but have no impact on the annual congressional pay raise sanctioned by law. Of the six senators who did vote for the pay raise, five—James Jeffords (I-Vt.), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Richard Lugar (RInd.), and Kit Bond (R-Mo.)—were long-time incumbents whose seats were not threatened, and one—Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.)—was about to retire. Typically, votes cast by members of Congress are relatively easy to predict. The empirical analysis of congressional voting patterns suggests that measures of ideology and party affiliation play a decisive role in explaining overall voting behavior. A vote on congressional pay, however, is not typical. It creates a dilemma for lawmakers by pitting two margins of self-interest against each other: pecuniary gains and reelection. Senators are clearly made better off by not opposing annual pay raises—salaries have increased from $98,400 in 1990 to $165,200 in 2006. Yet, those increases are likely to irritate voters and could harm a senator’s chances for reelection. In this article, we examine those conflicts of interest and how they affect voting behavior in the case of senatorial pay raises. It is often reported that cooperation among politicians, or bipartisanship, is a thing of the past. However, our results suggest that at least in the case of the Senate, when it comes to an issue as controversial as a pay increase, senators are fully capable of cooperating. More vulnerable senators (in terms of their probability of reelection) are allowed to vote against a pay raise, knowing that those in a more secure position can vote for the increase. The more vulnerable senators likely compensate senators who take the unpopular position of voting in favor of the pay increase with favorable votes on future legislation.
- Topic:
- Elections, Domestic Politics, Ideology, and Voting Behavior
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
425. The Effect of Judicial Selection Processes on Judicial Quality: The Role of Partisan Politics
- Author:
- Russell S. Sobel and Joshua C. Hall
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The quality of a state’s judicial system is an important determinant of economic growth and vitality. The decisions made within state judicial systems affect the degree to which private property rights are well-defined and enforced, which is an essential building block for entrepreneurial activity and economic growth. The key link between free-market institutions, such as secure property rights, and entrepreneurial activity has been demonstrated by Kreft and Sobel (2005) and Ovaska and Sobel (2005). Bad court decisions often infringe on the individual liberties and freedoms that are essential underpinnings for civil society and a well-functioning market economy (see Dorn 1985 and others in that special issue of the Cato Journal on this general topic). In addition, decisions made within state judicial systems also have important effects on the cost of doing business in a state. Poor liability rules reflected in state judicial decisions have been blamed for high medical malpractice rates, high workers’ compensation rates, and high automobile insurance rates in many states. Judicial decisions also impact the costliness of mandates and other regulations faced by businesses. Thus, it is clear that the judicial system is important for economic activity, and thus so is the selection mechanism that is used to determine the membership of state courts.
- Topic:
- Politics, Economic Growth, Judiciary, and Political Parties
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
426. Global Imbalances: Do They Matter?
- Author:
- Miranda Xafa
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- This article reviews the recent literature on global imbalances and discusses the policy implications of the various theories that have been advanced to explain their unprecedented increase. Most of these theories fit the stylized facts, namely, the steady increase in the U.S. current account deficit, the shift to a surplus position of the developing countries, and the low nominal and real interest rates globally. The “low U.S. savings” theory—reflecting the increase in the fiscal deficit and in housing wealth—views the current account deficit as the result of fiscal and monetary policy decisions in the United States that need to be urgently reversed to prevent a crash landing. Other theories however, focusing on developments outside the United States, portfolio balance effects, or previously neglected benign factors, do not yield such a doomsday scenario. It is relevant to note that there is no historical precedent of disorderly exchange rate adjustment in industrial countries that keep inflation under control (Croke, Kamin, and Leduc 2005). Concerns over a disorderly unwinding of global imbalances therefore appear exaggerated. This view, prevalent among market participants and several prominent academics, has not been widely embraced by policymakers.
- Topic:
- Monetary Policy, Economy, Wealth, and Savings
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America
427. Why the U.S. External Imbalance Matters
- Author:
- William R Cline
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Last year the U.S. current account deficit (mainly on trade but including capital income and transfers) reached almost 7 percent of GDP, or about twice as large a share as in 1987, the peak of the previous episode of large external imbalances and dollar overvaluation. A major reason is that from 1995 to 2002 the dollar rose by 28 percent against other currencies, after taking account of inflation and weighting by trade. A strong dollar made U.S. exports expensive and imports cheap, driving up the trade deficit after about a two-year reaction time. With large and persistent external deficits, the United States has swung from being the world’s largest creditor nation to its largest debtor, with net foreign liabilities now at about one-fourth of GDP. The dollar has corrected somewhat and is now about 13 percent lower on a trade-weighted basis than its average in 2002, based on the Federal Reserve’s broad real exchange rate index. Without that partial correction the trade deficit would now be even larger. It will likely require a decline of an additional 15 to 20 percent in the dollar to cut the current account deficit back to about 3 percent of GDP. That rate would be consistent with limiting net foreign liabilities to 50 percent of GDP in the long term. Exceeding that ceiling would seem imprudent for both the U.S. and global economies. It will be crucial that China, Japan, and much of the rest of Asia participate in realignment of their currencies against the dollar, because the decline of the dollar so far has been heavily concentrated against the euro and other industrial country currencies except for the Japanese yen. Dollar correction will also need to be accompanied by fiscal adjustment. Otherwise much of the competitive effect of the dollar adjustment would be offset by higher inflation and a dollar rebound from higher interest rates. Fundamentally the external deficit is the excess of resources used over resources produced, and with U.S. household saving near zero, the government cannot be a large net borrower without keeping the nation in large external deficit.
- Topic:
- Government, Finance, Economy, Currency, and Deficit
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
428. Economic Freedom and Net Business Formation
- Author:
- Noel D. Campbell and Tammy M. Rogers
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Economic freedom indexes, especially the Fraser Institute/Cato Institute Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) index and the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal Index of Economic Freedom, are becoming increasingly important as researchers seek to explore the link between economic freedom and prosperity. The consistent finding is that nations with more economic freedom—as indicated by security of property rights, free trade, limited government, low marginal tax rates, and so forth—enjoy higher per capita incomes and general living conditions compared with countries that are less free.1 In a less aggregated study, Karabegovic et al. (2003) find that differences in economic freedom across U.S. states and Canadian provinces are significantly and positively related to differences in the level and growth of economic activity across states and provinces. Various researchers have used the Economic Freedom of North America (EFNA) index, published by the Fraser Institute (Karabegovic, McMahon, and Mitchell 2005), to address questions of income differentials between states, income growth, and entrepreneurship.2 Scholars have also used the EFNA index to study migration. Ashby (2007), not surprisingly, finds that people tend to move from less free to more free areas.
- Topic:
- Migration, Economy, Business, Free Trade, and Freedom
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
429. Stockholders and Stakeholders: The Battle for Control of the Corporation
- Author:
- Donna Card Charron
- Publication Date:
- 01-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The American corporation is in trouble not only because of various immoral executives, but also because it is a target of sustained attacks. For several decades, corporate revisionists have toiled to transform the corporation from private to public property. Were they to succeed, the tragedy of the commons would slowly sap the corporation of its vitality. My objective in exposing the battle for corporate control is to urge and encourage those committed to the preservation of this highly performing institution to place the issue more prominently on their agenda. To this end, I detail the evolution of the battle and assess the present state of affairs. In so doing, I describe and critique “stakeholder theory,” the revisionist’s chosen weapon for gaining control of the corporation. Stakeholder theory currently dominates textbooks and syllabi of courses in business management, human resource management, marketing, and public policy. It colors the decisions of many corporate executives. And it controls the thinking in the majority of business ethics centers. Aware of its reach, I adumbrate a strategy for reversing the destructive inroads of stakeholder theory.
- Topic:
- Business, Management, Corporations, and Stakeholders
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
430. Global Imbalances: A Source of Strength or Weakness?
- Author:
- Kristin J. Forbes
- Publication Date:
- 07-2007
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Cato Journal
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Gross capital flows into the United States totaled $1.8 trillion in 2006. When combined with the $1.0 trillion the United States sent abroad, these net capital inflows funded the U.S. current account deficit of about $800 billion.1 The source of a large proportion of these capital inflows was developing economies—especially China and major oil exporters. Why are foreigners willing to invest such massive amounts of money in the U.S. economy? And perhaps even more surprising—why are countries with low levels of investment willing to send this relatively scarce resource to a capital-abundant economy instead of investing in their own countries? Understanding the motivation behind the millions of individual decisions that drive these capital inflows is critically important to understanding if this massive net transfer of capital into the United States reflects a strength or weakness of the global economy.
- Topic:
- Economy, Investment, and Capital
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus and United States of America