METHODOLOGICAL CRITIC OF “RESISTING THE PROTECTIONIST TEMPTATION: INDUSTRY AND THE MAKING OF TRADE POLICY IN FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES DURING THE 1970S” BY HELEN MILNER

(1) Restating the author’s major research question and theories (or hypotheses) in “if, then” type of generalization (here I want you to assess the author's IVs and DV); ◦Major question - ‘Why major industrial sectors of these economies stayed open despite the economic and political troubles of the 1970s?’ ◦The statement of hypothesis - Rising interdependence has greatly extended international economic ties for firms through exports, imports of production inputs, multinational production, and intra-firm trade. Firms with these type of international linkages are expected to have little interest in protectionism even in times of severe economic distress. The author aims on an international level change that affected the domestic preferences of firms and may have helped to maintain a relatively open economy during the 1970s and 1980s

◦Restating the hypothesis - If international economic interdependence increased (as exemplified by exports, multi-nationality, and global intra-firm trade), then the domestic preference of firms will be affected to choose relatively open economy and free trade, which, will influence on the structure of policy-making processes ◦IV - International economic interdependence (Export dependence, multi-nationality, and foreign investment) ◦DV - Firms preference, Relative economic openness, policy change

(2) Assessing the definitions the author had adopted for his independent and dependent variables and whether they are adequately used; ◦International economic interdependence -exports, imports of production inputs, multinational production, and intra-firm trade ◦Firms preference -increased global interdependence caused firms to prefer free trade, which in turn led them not to pressure for protectionism in the era of adverse economic shock, but to support continued openness. ◦Economic openness -Increased interdependence on trade, investment cause the increase of free market -Weakening protection

(3) Evaluating the procedures used in measuring variables and the tests devised to show causal relationship between the author's IVs and DV (here I want you to critique the author's selection of the cases.) Where the author’s method has shortcomings, show how it might have been improved. ◦GATT - ‘Some protection measures were greatly reduced’. - GATT raise it’s protection cost? -The policies of GATT more in detail ◦Firms preferences - Firms preferences are determinate by interdependency -Also can be determinate by the state in terms of development ◦States preference - States seek protection? - Ignored the states who prefers free trade. ◦U.S. and France - What about the other developed states?

◦The dependent variables -Too many---relative economic openness, policy change, weakened protectionism, trade preference ◦Observation based on DV - protection was not desired for industries whose firms had well-developed multinational operations and integrated global production and trade flows—even in times of rapidly rising imports,” ◦Cases major cases(US and French footwear industries, US automobile industries, French tire and glass industries, and the French TV industries)

◦How can she improves? -More detailed previous research -Rearrange the causal relationship -Restate the IV and DV -More different cases -Categorize her hypothesis  on what scale of economic openness can cause_____.