Rural Development Group Politics. A hidden cost?

I challenge the popular notion of European rural development group dynamics and argue for a better understanding of the role of micro-politics as a means of enhancing the performance of these groups. The views are research based and have relevance to the broader rural development and regeneration sector. Micro-politics involves knowledge, power, trust, perceptions, understanding, social networks, values and traits that arise as a result of individuals interacting within a group whilst working on a shared goal, such as rural development. The monetary and time costs to a community of failing to address micro-politics and nurture positive group relations are considerable. These include time spent in unproductive meetings and poorly prioritized—and ultimately unsuccessful—funding applications as a result of failure to agree priorities. Successful groups rely on individuals interacting in a way that achieves a greater social good. Mutual trust amongst the actors lies at the heart of effective group activity. Effective management of micro-politics requires steps to nurture a culture of mutual trust to ensure that rural development actors co-operate rather than play destructive games with one another. A case study example of a relatively straightforward approach illustrates how this might be done in practice.

The United States and trade disputes in the World Trade Organization: Hegemony constrained or confirmed?

Does the World Trade Organization function to reinforce American dominance (or hegemony) of the world economy? We examine this question via an analysis of trade disputes involving the United States. This allows us to assess whether the US does better than other countries in this judicialised forum: and in so doing enhance the competitive prospects of their firms. The results are equivocal. The United States does best in the early phases of a dispute, where political power is important. It does less well as the process develops.

A Firm Perspective of Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Cases in the United States

The role played by firms in the prosecution of anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases in the United States is understudied. This article provides greater understanding of the challenges faced by firms during the process of prosecuting anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases in the United States. This is achieved by applying a theoretical model of corporate political activity to data collected through interviews with 24 trade attorneys in Washington, D.C., practising in the area of antidumping and countervailing duty law. Anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases are found to require significant resource commitments from firms in the participating industries, as well as requiring individual firms to make a number of strategic decisions. The value of an affirmative decision and imposition of duties to the domestic and foreign industry is found to be more nuanced than previous studies have suggested. Non-duty effects of AD and CVD cases are also confirmed. Finally a clearer understanding of the role of individual firms in anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases is shown to have the potential to improve how industry influence is taken account of in future research.