INTERNATIONAL TRADE

116 views 9:07 am 0 Comments May 31, 2023

ECON8047 INTERNATIONAL TRADE S1 2023
Presentation
Total Marks 50 | Weighting 20%
PURPOSE
This assessment task relates to the following Learning Outcomes:
• Knowledge and Understanding: Be conversant with major trade theories and policy
measures.
• Application and Critical Thinking: Evaluate the impact of trade-related issues on countries
based on trade concepts and theories.
• Ethical Thinking: Evaluate the impact of trade-related issues on countries with a focus on the
tradeoffs between efficiency and equity.
PRESENTATION TOPIC
Since 2018, the US and China are engaged in a trade war that’s characterized by increased tariffs on
goods imported from both countries. According to the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the trade
war has eventually led to “tariffs on some US$ 550 billion worth of Chinese goods and US$ 185 billion
worth of US goods” (see a detailed timeline of the trade war from here by the SCMP). To put things in
perspective, the total US-China bilateral trade is worth about US$ 615.2 billion in 2020 (Source: USTR).
Using the materials from this unit, the following recommended readings (links on iLearn), as well as
references from your own research, in a 6-minute presentation, present the following:
• Your thoughts on the effectiveness of the trade war (i.e., has the trade war achieved its intended
purpose of reducing US trade deficit with China? Why do you think the trade war has been
effective/ineffective?),
• Your thoughts on the potential winners or losers from the trade war. What’s the impact of the
trade war on the consumers and producers from both countries?
• If you are a trade policy maker in either the US or China (pick one country’s position to argue),
will you recommend the trade war to continue? Why or why not?
Recommended Readings:
1. Feenstra, Robert C. and Taylor, Alan M. (2021), “Application: U.S. and Foreign Tariffs Under
President Trump, 2018-19”, International Trade, 5e, Macmillan Learning, Page 251.
2. Ossa, R. (2014). Trade wars and trade talks with data. American Economic Review, 104(12), 4104-46.
3. Egger, P. H., & Zhu, J. (2020). The US–Chinese trade war: an event study of stock-market
responses. Economic Policy, 35(103), 519-559.
4. Ding, H., Pu, B., Qi, T., & Wang, K. (2022). Valuation effects of the US–China trade war: The effects of
foreign managers and foreign exposure. Journal of Economic Surveys, 36(3), 662-683.
5. Zhou, W., & Gao, H. (2020). US–China Trade War: A Way Out?. World Trade Review, 19(4), 605-617.
1 / 2
ECON8047 INTERNATIONAL TRADE S1 2023
MARKING RUBRIC

Criteria Fail: 0-4 marks Pass (P): 5-6 marks Credit (Cr): 7 marks Distinction (D): 8 marks High Distinction: 10 marks
Articulation of issues (10 marks)
Issues are clearly stated and
succinctly yet comprehensively
explained based on economic and
ethical viewpoints.		 Student does not provide any
description of issues showing no
understanding of economic and
ethical viewpoints.		 Student poorly describes issues
demonstrating limited understanding
of the economic and ethical
viewpoints.		 Student mostly effectively describes
issues demonstrating fair
understanding of economic and
ethical viewpoints.		 Student effectively describes issues
demonstrating deep understanding
of economic and ethical
viewpoints.		 Student effectively and creatively
describes issues demonstrating an
extensive understanding of economic
and ethical viewpoints.
Analysis (10 marks)
Issues are analysed using relevant
and appropriate economic and ethical
theories, concepts, arguments,
research studies or examples.
Analysis takes into account
diverse/competing perspectives.		 Student fails to demonstrate an
analysis substantiating any of
made claims through theories,
concepts, arguments, research
studies or examples.		 Student poorly demonstrates a
limited analysis, and develop poor
arguments by relying on irrelevant
theories, concepts, arguments,
research studies or examples.		 Student accurately demonstrates an
analysis, and develops fair arguments
but lack substantiation through
relevant theories, concepts,
arguments, research studies or
examples.		 Student accurately demonstrates
an analysis, and develops
appropriate arguments
substantiating made claims
through relevant theories,
concepts, arguments, research
studies or examples.		 Student accurately and insightfully
demonstrates an analysis, and
masterfully develops arguments
substantiating made claims through
relevant theories, concepts,
arguments, research studies or
examples.
Position (10 marks)
The analysis is interpreted, evaluated,
integrated and/or synthesised to
support and provide evidence for a
clear overall position, demonstrating
independent well-reasoned economic
and ethical judgement.		 Student fails to support and
provide evidence for a clear and
independent position. There is no
interpretation and integration of
the analysis for an independent
reasoned judgement.		 Student struggles to demonstrate a
clear position and independent
reasoned judgement. Student
ordinarily provides an interpretation
and integration of the analysis.		 Student accurately demonstrates a
clear position and independent
reasoned judgement. Student mostly
effectively provides an interpretation
and integration of the analysis.		 Student accurately demonstrates a
clear position and independent
reasoned judgement. Student
effectively provides an
interpretation and integration of
the analysis.		 Student accurately and insightfully
demonstrates a clear position and
independent reasoned judgement.
Student effectively and creatively
provides an interpretation and
integration of the analysis.
Critique (10 marks)
Assumptions and implications of the
position are identified, considered
and appropriately defended.		 Student fails to identify a counter
argument and defend his/her
position against it based on
assumptions and implications of
analysis and position.		 Student struggles to identify a
counter argument and defend his/her
position against it based on
assumptions and implications of
analysis and position.		 Student accurately identifies a
counter argument and defends
his/her position against it based on
assumptions and implications of
analysis and position.		 Student skilfully identifies a
counter argument and defends
his/her position against it based on
assumptions and implications of
analysis and position.		 Student skilfully and insightfully
identifies a counter argument and
defends his/her position against it
based on assumptions and
implications of analysis and position.
Organisation and Communication
(10 marks)
Clarity of structure and text logic;
Appropriate use of academic tone;
Accurate use of references		 Text has no formal structure.
Very poor text logic with frequent
use of contradictions. Absence of
academic tone due to consistent
use of informal language.
Referencing is non-conforming to
standard style or absent. Articles
are from non-reputable sources,
irrelevant to arguments, or do
not substantiate made claims.		 Text has under-developed formal
structure. Poor text logic with
recurrent use of contradictions.
Inappropriate academic tone due to
frequent use of informal language.
Referencing is mainly inaccurate or
does not conform to a standard style.
Articles are often from non-scientific
sources, irrelevant to arguments, or
do not help to substantiate made
claims.		 Text has formal structure.
Satisfactory text logic with some use
of contradictions. Inconsistent
academic tone due to use of informal
language. Referencing is fairly
accurate using standard style.
Articles are mostly from reputable
sources, are relevant to arguments
and substantiate made claims.		 Text has clear and well developed
formal structure. Excellent text
logic with miniscule use of
contradictions. Appropriate
academic tone. Referencing is
mainly accurate using standard
style. Articles are from reputable
sources, are very relevant to
arguments and thoughtfully
substantiate made claims.		 Text has clear and original formal
structure. Outstanding text logic with
no use of contradictions. Appropriate
and confident academic tone.
Referencing is impeccably accurate
using standard style. Articles are from
highly reputable sources, are highly
relevant to arguments, and
insightfully substantiate made claims.

2/ 2