Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
  • Register
  • Login
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Journal Information
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Editorial Team
  • Fees
  • Ethics and Policies
  • Submission
  • Register
  • Login

Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics and Law

Liberalizing and harmful interventions in international trade: case of Poland
  • Home
  • /
  • Liberalizing and harmful interventions in international trade: case of Poland
  1. Home /
  2. Archives /
  3. Vol. 21 No. 1 (2022) /
  4. Articles

Liberalizing and harmful interventions in international trade: case of Poland

Authors

  • Agnieszka Piekutowska University of Bialystok https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7923-9484

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2022.011

Keywords

protectionism, international trade, Poland, interventions

Abstract

Motivation: As there is a need to track and analysis — with its practical implications — the responsibility for actions affecting international trade, therefore exploration of trade interventions implemented by Poland has its justification.

Aim: The aim of the paper is to reveal direction, scale and dynamics of both liberalizing and harmful interventions in international trade implemented by Poland. The goal to achieve is to answer crucial question: to what extent, EU protectionism is shaped by EU bodies only — and to what extent by Poland by itself.

Results: An analysis reveals both country-specific direction of interventions as well as country-specific sectors affected by liberalizing and harmful interventions. Although part of all interventions is those of EU bodies, Poland uses for instance state aid to stimulate national businesses as not all kinds of state aid are forbidden by EU law (types listed on not so short list in Article 107 of TFEU). Thus, as member states differ in their economic interests, one can observe differentiation in state interventions in scope of international trade.

References

Abboushi, S. (2010). Trade protectionism: reasons and outcomes. Competitiveness Review, 20(5), 384–394. https://doi.org/10.1108/10595421011080760.

Alter, K.J., & Meunier-Aitsahalia, S. (1994). Judicial politics in the European community: European integration and the pathbreaking cassis de Dijon decision. Comparative Political Studies, 26(4), 535–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414094026004007.

Aussilloux, V., Emlinger, C., & Fontagné, L. (2011). What benefits from completing the single market. La Lettre du CEPII, 316.

Balassa, B. (1961). Towards a theory of economic integration. Kyklos: International Review for Social Sciences, 14(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1961.tb02365.x.

Barattieri, A., Cacciatore, M., & Ghiron, F. (2021). Protectionism and the business cycle. Journal of International Economics, 129(103417), 103417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2020.103417.

Bolkestein, F., & Gerken, L. (2015). The EU single market, protectionism and excessive regulation. Retrieved 25.03.2021 from https://www.cep.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/sop-cep.de/SOP/SOP-Presse/Presse-Archiv/EU_Single_Market_by_Bolkestein_and_Gerken.pdf.

Chen, N. (2004). Intra-national versus international trade in the European Union: why do national borders matter. Journal of international Economics, 63(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1996(03)00042-4.

Clubb, B.E. (1971). Conflicting assumptions about international trade: neo-protectionism or reasonable accommodation of national interests. American Journal of International Law, 65(4), 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0002930000261824.

Czaja, I., & Wach, K. (2009). Changes in Poland’s foreign trade turnover before and after accession to the European Union. Cracow Review of Economics and Management, 799, 145–161.

Enderwick, P. (2011). Understanding the rise of global protectionism. Thunderbird International Business Review, 53(3), 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.20410.

Erixon, F., & Sally, R. (2010). Trade, globalisation and emerging protectionism since the crisis. ECIPE Working Paper, 02/2010, 1–20.

European Commission. (2010). State aid/Poland. Retrieved 17.03.2021 from https://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/234044/234044_1118402_56_1.pdf.

European Commission. (2017). State aid/Poland. Retrieved 16.03.2021 from https://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/257535/257535_1893966_124_2.pdf.

European Commission. (2021). Competition cases search tool. Retrieved 15.03.2021 from https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.

Evenett, S.J. (2009). Global trade alert: motivation and launch. World Trade Review, 8(4), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745609990061.

Fajgelbaum, P.D., Goldberg, P.K., Kennedy P.J., & Khandelwal A.K. (2020). The Return to Protectionism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjz036.

Francois, J., & Hoekman, B. (Eds.). (2019). Behind-the-border policies: assessing and addressing non-tariff measures. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108751698.

Global Trade Alert. (2021). Database. Retrieved 01.03.2021 from https://www.globaltradealert.org.

Grottel, M. (2016). Protekcjonizm we współczesnym handlu międzynarodowym. International Business and Global Economy, 35(1), 69–80.

Habarta, A. (2016). Characteristics of foreign trade and investment policy of Poland. Contemporary Europe, 6, 97–106. https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope6201697106.

International Monetary Fund. (2016). World economic outlook: subdued demand: symptoms and remedies. Retrieved 01.03.2021 from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2016/12/31/Subdued-Demand-Symptoms-and-Remedies.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 July 1974. Pierre Guillot v Commission of the European Communities. Case 53–72. European Court Reports 1974–00791 (ECLI:EU:C:1974:80).

Korwatanasakul, U., & Baek, Y. (2021). The effect of non-tariff measures on global value chain participation. Global Economic Review, 50(3), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1226508X.2020.1862694.

Koszewska, M. (2007). Poland’s trade policy and its changes in the context of European integration: consequences for the protective clothing market. Fibres and Textiles in Eastern Europe, 15(4), 9–12.

Le, V.P.M., Minford, P., & Nowell, E. (2009). European economic policy: protectionism as an elite strategy. In A. Gamble, & D. Lane (Eds.), The European Union and world politics (pp. 217–234). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230246188_12.

Lewis, M.K. (2009). The EU’s protectionism problem. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 10(2), 23–29.

Molendowski, E. (2014). Akcesja Polski do UE i jej wpływ na strumienie handlu z nowymi państwami członkowskimi (UE–10). Miscellanea Oeconomicae, 18(1), 103–116.

Pelkmans, J., & de Brito, A. (2012). Enforcement in the EU single market. Centre for European Policy Studies.

Piekutowska, A., & Marcinkiewicz, J. (2020). Protectionism in international trade: the case of the European Union member states. European Research Studies Journal, 23(2), 728–740. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1618.

Scharpf, F.W. (2010). The asymmetry of European integration, or why the EU cannot be a ‘social market economy’. Socio-Economic Review, 8(2), 211–250. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwp031.

Semeniuk, P. (2019). Protekcjonizm gospodarczy w Unii Europejskiej. Retrieved 01.03.2021 from https://pie.net.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Raport_Protekcjonizm_gospodarczy_w_Unii_Europejskiej.pdf.

Stefanescu, F. (2009). The economic crisis and protectionism. Romanian Economic and Business Review, 4(3), 199–213.

World Integrated Trade Solutions. (2021). Database. Retrieved 25.02.2021 from https://wits.worldbank.org.

Wysokińska, Z. (2017). Effects of Poland’s pro-export policy implementation in the context of the plan for responsible development: a preliminary comparative assessment. Comparative Economic Research: Central and Eastern Europe, 20(4), 101–123. https://doi.org/10.1515/cer-2017-0030.

Yatsenko, O., Stašys, R., Tsygankova, T., Reznikova, N., & Uskova, D. (2020). Protectionism sources of trade disputes within international economic relations. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development: Scientific Journal, 42(4), 516–526. https://doi.org/10.15544/mts.2020.53.

Yi, C.D. (2020). The computable general equilibrium analysis of the reduction in tariffs and non-tariff measures within the Korea–Japan–European Union free trade agreement. Japan and the World Economy, 56, 101037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2020.101037.

Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics and Law

Downloads

  • PDF

Published

2022-03-31

How to Cite

1.
PIEKUTOWSKA, Agnieszka. Liberalizing and harmful interventions in international trade: case of Poland. Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics and Law. Online. 31 March 2022. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 205-223. [Accessed 7 July 2025]. DOI 10.12775/EiP.2022.011.
  • ISO 690
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
Download Citation
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 1 (2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Agnieszka Piekutowska

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Stats

Number of views and downloads: 1487
Number of citations: 0

Search

Search

Browse

  • Browse Author Index
  • Issue archive

Information

  • For Readers
  • For Authors
  • For Librarians

User

User

Contact

Principal Contact
Piotr Wiśniewski
psw@umk.pl
Support Contact
Grzegorz Kopcewicz
Phone (56) 611 26 93
greg@umk.pl

cross_check

The journal content is indexed in CrossCheck, the CrossRef initiative to prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism

Up

Akademicka Platforma Czasopism

Najlepsze czasopisma naukowe i akademickie w jednym miejscu

apcz.umk.pl

Partners

  • Akademia Ignatianum w Krakowie
  • Akademickie Towarzystwo Andragogiczne
  • Fundacja Copernicus na rzecz Rozwoju Badań Naukowych
  • Instytut Historii im. Tadeusza Manteuffla Polskiej Akademii Nauk
  • Instytut Kultur Śródziemnomorskich i Orientalnych PAN
  • Instytut Tomistyczny
  • Karmelitański Instytut Duchowości w Krakowie
  • Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego
  • Państwowa Akademia Nauk Stosowanych w Krośnie
  • Państwowa Akademia Nauk Stosowanych we Włocławku
  • Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im. Stanisława Pigonia w Krośnie
  • Polska Fundacja Przemysłu Kosmicznego
  • Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne
  • Polskie Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze
  • Towarzystwo Miłośników Torunia
  • Towarzystwo Naukowe w Toruniu
  • Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
  • Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie
  • Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika
  • Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
  • Uniwersytet Warszawski
  • Wojewódzka Biblioteka Publiczna - Książnica Kopernikańska
  • Wyższe Seminarium Duchowne w Pelplinie / Wydawnictwo Diecezjalne „Bernardinum" w Pelplinie
Ekonomia i Prawo. Economics and Law
Katedra Ekonomii 
Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych i Zarządzania 
Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu 
ul. Gagarina 13A 
87-100 Toruń

Principal Contact

Piotr Wiśniewski
psw@umk.pl

Support Contact

Grzegorz Kopcewicz
Phone (56) 611 26 93
greg@umk.pl

© 2021- Nicolaus Copernicus University Accessibility statement Shop