Economy & Trade, Europe, Headlines, North America

TRADE: US, West European Publics Like the Idea Not the Practice

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jul 13 2004 (IPS) - Most U.S. and West European citizens strongly back the concept of more international trade, but show a lot less support for specific trade agreements and mechanisms, according to a major new survey on aid and trade released Tuesday by the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

The survey, which polled opinion in the United States, Britain, France and Germany, found significant differences on some issues between the U.S. and European respondents.

U.S. citizens, for example, were found to be less supportive of official development assistance (ODA) as a means of fighting global poverty, less supportive of negotiating new trade agreements, and more inclined to support protection for the U.S. cotton industry and patents on life-saving drugs than their European counterparts, according to the survey, which was based on interviews carried out in May with about 1,000 respondents in each country.

But on most issues, the U.S. public appeared more or less in tune with their European cousins, suggesting that, unlike in the foreign-policy area, there appears to be a general consensus on issues of trade and aid in western countries.

Respondents also seemed to share a common belief that multinational companies benefit significantly more from international trade than small businesses or ”ordinary people”, although those views were significantly more pronounced in France (where 65 percent said multinationals were the biggest beneficiaries) than in Britain (43 percent).

The survey, which comes as western negotiators are trying hard to get World Trade Organisation (WTO) Doha Round negotiations back on track, appears designed in part to determine what messages would be most effective in rallying western public opinion to provide greater support for new trade deals.

It found overwhelming support in all four countries for appeals based on recognising public concerns and worries about the negative effects of international trade, as well as extolling its advantages.

”Survey responses suggest that policymakers have an opportunity to broaden support for new trade agreements if they address ‘trade pessimists’ concerns regarding workers, the environment, transparency and developing countries”, a 30-page analysis that accompanied the poll found.

”Only if opinion leaders seek substantive rather than superficial solutions to assuage public uncertainty, can we move to a real discussion of the future direction of trade policy,” it added.

One of the clearest findings of the survey, called ‘Reconciling Trade and Poverty Reduction’, is that the public in both the United States and the European Union likes the idea of ”free” or ”international” trade more than the specific agreements that underpin it.

Overwhelming majorities ranging from 83 percent in France to 87 percent in Britain and the United States said they either ”strongly” or ”somewhat” favour international trade, although the most intense support was found in Britain, where 49 percent answered ”strongly”, compared to only 26 percent who took that position in France.

On the other hand, respondents had a far more restrained view of ”globalisation,” to which pluralities of 49 percent in the United States and Britain and 42 percent in France responded favourably. In Germany, a majority of 51 percent responded unfavourably.

When asked about specific trade agreements, the public was found to be anything but enthusiastic. While in the three European countries the survey found relatively strong support for the idea of ”free movement of people, goods and services in the EU’s internal market”, only one in five respondents in France and Germany, and none in Britain, said they had a favourable opinion of the EU Internal Market.

Similarly, while 43 percent of U.S. respondents said they had a favourable view of the free movement of people, goods and services between the United States, Canada and Mexico, only four percent said they had a favourable opinion of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

As for the World Trade Organisation (WTO), 42 percent of U.S. respondents assessed it as favourable, compared to 29 percent who were against it and a comparable percentage who had no opinion. The percentages were much the same in both Britain and Germany, while public opinion in France was decidedly unfavourable.

At the same time, only 54 percent of U.S. respondents said they wanted to negotiate new trade agreements, while four out of every five Europeans said they were keen on the idea.

Just as respondents were more sceptical about specific trade agreements than about the principle of free trade, so they were more opposed to protectionism as a general principle than they were to ”protecting” specific industries, especially farming and small businesses.

With the exception of Germany, solid majorities in each country said they were willing to support protectionist measures if European and U.S. farmers were at risk of being driven out of business.

Solid majorities in each country said they believed trade was preferable to aid as an effective tool for reducing poverty in poor countries, but that position was particularly pronounced in the United States, where twice as many respondents (27 percent) ”strongly” opposed aid in principle as in Europe.

At the same time, almost two-thirds of all respondents said poor countries should get special consideration in the negotiation of new trade agreements because of the destructive impact global competition may have on their relatively fragile economies.

Domestically, according to even greater majorities, governments should provide workers who may lose their jobs due to foreign competition more assistance in the form of education, retraining and other support.

To gain more popular support for new trade agreements, proponents – according to the survey – should convey two fundamental messages that large majorities of respondents in all four countries found particularly ”convincing”.

Four out of five respondents agreed: "International trade contributes to prosperity and should therefore be welcomed, but not at all cost. The U.S. and EU must stand up for labour and human rights standards and protect jobs, the environment and our children. Otherwise, we’ll get a race to the bottom, with jobs being moved to sweatshops in China, workers in developing countries living in abominable conditions, and the loss of our ability to protect against tainted foods. That would be a race without winners, perhaps with the exception of a small group of big businesses”.

Three out of four respondents agreed with the second message: "International trade has both positive and negative effects. International trade brings a lot of benefits … but also causes a lot of disruption in millions of workers’ households with people losing their jobs. With the world becoming a smaller and smaller place, we need to make trade work for everyone. For us in (your country), that means we need to invest more in skills and technology so that our economy becomes more flexible and innovative.”