As we turn the page at World Trade, you’ll notice that aside from our new name-WT100-we’ve begun to make some editorial changes too.

Our Policy Perspectives column has been replaced with Green Matters-a column summarizing ‘green’ news in the logistics sector as well as broader sustainability initiatives.

Great Moments, which highlighted historical milestones in world trade, has been swapped out for SCI-fi (the “SCI” standing for Supply Chain Innovations), a column profiling cutting edge, radical, and in some cases ‘still on the drawing board’ developments and technologies that have potential for future supply chains.

In this month’s annual survey of the U.S.’ leading trade partners and biggest imports and exports, one thing stayed the same, however, and that’s Canada’s position as our top trade partner. We again consulted Coface for their assessment of the risk associated with these trade partners and also added several new indices, like the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom and the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Ranking, to see how our top 15 trade partners fared on other fronts.

It’s worth mentioning that our trade relationship with Canada isn’t entirely rosy at the moment, with the ‘Buy American’ provision contained within the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act causing a bit of friction with our northern neighbor.

Susan Kohn Ross, International Trade Counsel with Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP addressed this issue recently, calling into question the three arguments that are typically used to defend Buy American provisions.

The first argument states that most other countries have similar provisions. “But, since when did the fact that lots of folks do something make it right?” she asks. Moreover, taxpayer money shouldn’t be spent on foreign products, and third, using American-made inputs supports American jobs, say supporters of the Buy American provision. “Certainly, we all want to see full employment, but there are four industries that the U.S. has historically protected through high tariffs and non-tariff barriers (such as quotas)-automobiles, wearing apparel and textile products, footwear, and steel and steel products. How many of them are competitive in today’s world market?” Ross responds. She adds that, “As to spending taxpayer money for these infrastructure projects, shouldn’t the goal be to get the best return on our investment? All things being equal, including the safety and efficacy of the finished product, shouldn’t we use the cheapest inputs, even if they are foreign? Doesn’t the government have a fiduciary duty to get the best bang for the taxpayer buck?”

And yet, just when it looks like rising protectionism is getting a foothold, our trade relations with Cuba are showing the earliest signs of reparation, as contributing editor Dan McCue reports this month. President Obama’s easing of family travel restrictions and remittances earlier this year has given hope to many in the trade community that the long-standing trade embargo will eventually be dismantled too. 

Administrations change. Trade policies change. World trade (and World Trade) changes.

As always, we welcome your view. Drop us an email or visit us on Facebook and let us know what you see.