Research on The Role of Trust and Optimization Strategies in America-Japan Negotiation

Diwen Zheng

doi:10.62051/xr6gxp57

Authors

Diwen Zheng

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/xr6gxp57

Keywords:

Cross-Cultural Negotiations; US-Japan Trade; Tariff Reductions; Digital Trade Standards; Bilateral Cooperation.

Abstract

In the dynamic and diverse global economy, understanding the nuances of cross-cultural negotiations is crucial, particularly in trade relations between major economic powers such as the US and Japan. Cultural missteps and inappropriate approaches can significantly impact negotiation strategies and trust-building efforts. This research paper highlights cultural barriers and the importance of adapting strategies in the evolving US-Japan trade relationship, framed by the comprehensive US-Japan trade agreement. Key issues identified include limited market access for US agricultural products and asymmetrical digital trade standards. The report proposes solutions such as revisiting tariffs, enhancing bilateral agricultural cooperation, harmonizing data protection regulations, and engaging the private sector. Additionally, it recommends broader policy considerations, such as exploring comprehensive FTA agreements and fostering people-to-people exchanges. These strategies aim to stimulate economic growth, strengthen diplomatic ties, and promote long-term global peace and stability. However, the study notes its reliance on secondary data and suggests future research incorporate primary data for more detailed insights. Overall, this research offers valuable guidelines for optimizing US-Japan trade strategies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Khakhar, P., & Rammal, H. G. Culture and business networks: International business negotiations with Arab managers. International Business Review, 22(3), 578–590. (2013)

[2] Kęstutis Peleckis.. International business negotiation strategies based on bargaining power assessment: the case of attracting investments. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 17(6). (2016)

[3] Grzeskowiak, S., & Al-Khatib, J. A. Does morality explain opportunism in marketing channel negotiations?: The moderating role of trust. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 37(2), 142–160. (2009).

[4] Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. Expatriate learning: exploring how Japanese managers adapt in the United States. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(8), 1373–1395. (2007).

[5] In Focus. US-Japan Trade Agreements and Negotiations. Congressional Research Service. Available on: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11120 (2024)

[6] Gaesser, L. A., Kobayashi, N., & Wilson, N. L. W. The US—Japan Trade Agreement: Will It Lead to Greener Pastures for US Beef? In Choices (Ames, Iowa) (316th ed., Vol. 35, Issue 3, pp. 1–7). Agricultural & Applied Economics Association. (2020).

[7] Adekola, T. A. Revisiting the public health implications of the United States–Mexico– Canada agreement. Globalization and Health, 16(1), 1–50. (2020).

[8] Rutherford, B. Japan puts final stamp of approval on US-Japan trade agreement for beef. Beef. (2019).

[9] Imbruno, M. China and WTO liberalization: Imports, tariffs and non-tariff barriers. China Economic Review, 38, 222–237. (2016).

[10] Fung, K. C., Aminian, N., Fu, X. (Maggie), Rhee, J. H., & Tung, C. Y. “Silicon trade policies” and a comparative analysis of China-US and Japan-US trade conflicts. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 18(1), 29–50. (2020).

[11] Jung, J. The Effects of China’s Participation in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP): A Quantitative Assessment. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 15(1), 344-. (2023).

[12] Li, C., & Whalley, J. Effects of the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans‐pacific partnership. World Economy, 44(5), 1312–1337. (2021).

[13] Ha, S. T., Pham, T. H. H., & Nguyen, T. N. A. Stock Market Reactions to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership’s Approval: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of Economic Integration, 36(3), 462–490. (2021).

[14] Liu, B., Feng, K., Sun, L., & Baiocchi, G. Does interstate trade of agricultural products in the US alleviate land and water stress? Journal of Environmental Management, 354, 120427–120427. (2024).

[15] C. Chiang, T. Economic policy uncertainty and stock returns—evidence from the Japanese market. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 4(3), 430–458. (2020).

[16] Walter, T. Trade and welfare effects of a potential free trade agreement between Japan and the United States. Review of World Economics, 158(4), 1199–1230. (2022).

[17] US, Japan Finalize Digital Trade Agreement. Telecommunications Reports, 85(17), 6–6. (2019).

[18] Loginova, Daria, et al. “Assessing the Effects of Seasonal Tariff‐rate Quotas on Vegetable Prices in Switzerland.” Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 72, no. 2, (2021), pp. 607–27,

[19] Coates, Andrew, et al., editors. Navigating Legal Challenges in the Agrochemical Industry. American Chemical Society, (2020).

[20] Chen, Tuo, et al. Non-Tariff Barriers in the US-China Trade War. National Bureau of Economic Research, (2022).

[21] Burri, M. Cross-border data flows and privacy in global trade law: has trade trumped data protection? Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 39(1), 85–97. (2023).

[22] Atkinson, C. Africa’s potential “born digital” trade agreement: The African Continental Free Trade Area Agreement has the potential to be innovative in its conception as a 21st century arrangement and become the world’s first “born digital” trade agreement. International Trade Forum, (1), 28. (2019)

[23] Benguria, F. Do US exporters take advantage of free trade agreements? Evidence from the US‐Colombia free trade agreement. Review of International Economics, 30(4), 1148–1179. (2022)