About Michael Gasiorek

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Michael Gasiorek has created 90 blog entries.

In memory: Jim Rollo

We are deeply saddened to hear of the death, after a long illness, on 25th September of our dear friend and colleague Professor Jim Rollo, a hugely distinguished expert on international economics and European Studies. He was a founder member of the UKTPO and its first Deputy Director in 2016. He joined Sussex University in 1999 after a non-university career starting in the Ministry of Agriculture and going on to be Director of the International Economics Research Programme at Chatham House 1989 - 1993 and Chief Economic Adviser at the Foreign Office. He joined the University of Sussex to be the co-director of the Sussex European Institute where he led a Chevening Fellowship programme for highflyers from across non-EU Europe who wanted to study European Issues, many of them from Poland. He was Editor of the Journal of Common Market Studies (JCMS) from 2003 to 2010 and helped found the InterAnalysis consultancy in 2009 and led training courses across Africa and Asia. He was much respected and loved for his erudition, his wit and his deep economic insights. He was an immensely kind and thoughtful, as well as being charming and funny. Everyone who met Jim remembers him fondly. He [...]

By , , , |2025-09-30T09:02:30+01:0026 September 2025|Blog|28 Comments
Read More

A few important steps forward: the UK-EU strategic partnership

The current UK Government is focused on delivering economic growth and positioning the UK as an important economic and diplomatic player internationally. The relationship with the EU is probably the most crucial bit in this jigsaw, and the deal struck on Monday, outlined in a “Common Understanding”, indicates the direction of travel: cautiously and selectively rebuilding closer relations with the EU along a number of dimensions, first and foremost on security and defence matters, but also including energy, environmental, and some economic aspects. We will discuss three particular areas that are related to trade in the ‘common understanding’: fisheries and trade in agri-food products, youth mobility, and cooperation on energy markets and carbon emissions, respectively.  We explain why the deal delivers in two out of three areas.  More could have been done, and with firmer commitments.  The document essentially represents a negotiating agenda with mostly aspirational language, whereby the two parties agree to “work towards” certain outcomes and everything has to be finally negotiated.  Yet every journey starts with a single step, and the one taken on Monday is a sensible step in the right direction. Fish and food: Significant departures from Brexit A core, perhaps the main, EU demand [...]

By , , , , |2025-05-21T18:45:18+01:0021 May 2025|Blog, International Trade, UK- EU|0 Comments
Read More

Blinded by the light: The trouble with today’s trade policy

Trade policy is more difficult today that it was three months ago, and significantly more so than five years ago. The former is due to the actions of the new US administration, but the latter is a more complicated story that has dramatically changed trade policy across the world. Over the last 30 years or so trade policymakers have largely focused on efficiency gains - more open markets leading to better productivity and economic growth. This was more or less taken for granted, backed by considerable evidence. The distributional implications and broader concerns beyond economic growth have been seen as beyond the purview of trade policy, perhaps too easily. Once again, trade policy makers and analysts either took for granted that these issues were not so important in the trade context, or if they were, they would be dealt with by other areas of government policy. However, in today’s world even efficiency and equity considerations fail to adequately capture the concerns of trade policy. Unforeseen events – Covid-19, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, extreme weather, and semi foreseen events such as Trump tariffs – have underpinned increasing concerns about economic security, supply chain resilience and national security, and the threats [...]

By |2025-05-02T11:25:34+01:004 April 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

How much damage could Trump’s tariffs do and what can be done?

The short answer to the first part of the question is: “a lot” - and the damage is likely to be both globally and to the US itself. A longer answer is that, in many respects, we do not really know. This is because it is unclear why these US policies are being introduced, whether they may be reversed, and what other policies may be introduced or threatened both by the US as well as by other countries. The short answer to the second part of the question is “not much”. However, a the longer answer would be: it is horribly complicated with so many unknowns, but governments and businesses need to think long term, cooperate and be proactive as opposed to reactive. This is not easy. At present the policies being introduced against other countries largely amount to threatening to introduce or raise tariffs on goods. If we therefore focus on goods trade in 2023, the United States accounted for just under 14.5% of world imports, and just over 8% of world exports. This means that out of the total world demand for goods being exported, the US buys one-seventh of these and supplies roughly one-twelfth of world exports. [...]

By |2025-02-03T17:20:17+00:003 February 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

Trump’s tariffs: How much should we be concerned and why?

With President Donald Trump’s second term, the debate over the use of tariffs is making headlines. On his first day in office Trump once again raised the prospect of the strategic use of these tariffs: he threatened to impose them unless partner countries (Mexico, Canada or the EU) introduced changes in their trade policies or made concessions in other domains (China with TikTok). This approach is likely to have profound implications for both the US as well as on the global economy for three key reasons. First, it will impact the already strained multilateral trading system. Second, there are direct consequences of US tariffs on individual partner countries. Third, there is the question of how effective such actions will be for the US, and that will also depend on the extent of any retaliatory measures. The UK-U.S. Trade Relationship Trump has threatened to impose sweeping tariffs—ranging from 10% to 20% on all trading partners, and up to 60% on Chinese imports. These statements clearly cover a multitude of possibilities, and this generates considerable uncertainty. The UK government appears hopeful that as the US does not have a trade deficit with the UK, that the UK may not be targeted. However, [...]

By , |2025-02-03T17:18:22+00:0024 January 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

BP 83 – How Much Free Trade in UK Free Trade Agreements?

Download Briefing Paper 83 Briefing Paper 83 - July 2024 Adriana Brenis, Michael Gasiorek and Manuel Tong Koecklin Key points Introduction UK exports and MFN tariffs Preference utilisation rates Rules Of Origin Determinants of preference utilisation Conclusion Key points The UK has signed continuity agreements with South Korea (2019) and Canada (2020), to maintain the terms of the previous EU deals with both trading partners, as well as the Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the EU (2021). In 2022, the EU, Canada and Korea accounted for 45.2%, 1.5% and 1.1% of UK exports respectively. These deals provide for zero preferential tariffs on most UK exports to these countries. In practice, not all exports utilise the preferential tariff rates. In 2021, under the UK-EU deal, the ‘Preference Utilisation Rate’ (PUR) was 69%, rising to 74% in 2022. For UK-Korea, the rates were 60% and 56% respectively, while for Canada they were only 30% and 52%. Preference utilisation will typically depend on the level of the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) tariffs. The higher the tariff, the greater the incentive to use the preference. Other factors such as the value of trade; as well as how difficult it is for firms [...]

By , , |2025-12-17T16:38:10+00:0018 December 2024|Comments Off on BP 83 – How Much Free Trade in UK Free Trade Agreements?
Read More

Briefing Paper 81 – LABOUR’S PROGRESSIVE TRADE POLICY: CONSULTATIONS AND POLICY FORMULATION

In this Briefing Paper, Michael Gasiorek, Justyna A. Robinson, Rhys Sandow assess the views expressed by those who responded to the Labour Party’s 2023 national consultation on UK trade policy. Read Briefing Paper 81 –LABOUR’S PROGRESSIVE TRADE POLICY: CONSULTATIONS AND POLICY FORMULATION

By , , |2024-11-20T12:40:50+00:001 July 2024|Briefing Papers|0 Comments
Read More

BP 81 – Labour’s Progressive Trade Policy: Consultations and policy formulation

Download Briefing Paper 81 Briefing Paper 81 - June 2024 Michael Gasiorek, Justyna A. Robinson, Rhys Sandow Key points Introduction Principal messages Results of responses to the LPF questions Conclusion Key points In 2023 the Labour Party initiated a National Policy Forum consultation as an input into their policy development. The consultation invited written responses which were open to both party members and the general public. The responses regarding progressive trade policy reveal a wide range of views on the role of trade and trade policy. Overall, across the responses to all the questions the strongest messages are that trade (policy) should aim to increase growth and productivity while also reducing poverty and inequality. At the same time there are five broader themes which emerge, which reveal a concern with the relationship between trade and welfare and rights, the environment, supply chains, (free) trade agreements, and the processes underpinning the negotiation of trade deals. Specifically, also, respondents overwhelmingly express negative stances towards Brexit and favour closer ties with the EU. Examining in more detail the responses by questions, picks up on some of the themes above, but also reveals a clear concern with what might be termed a [...]

By , , |2025-12-12T10:46:43+00:0014 June 2024|Comments Off on BP 81 – Labour’s Progressive Trade Policy: Consultations and policy formulation
Read More

Why discussion of Trade Policy matters in the General Election

30 May 2024 - Ingo Borchert is Deputy Director of the UKTPO, a Member of the Leadership Group of the Centre for Inclusive Trade Policy (CITP) and a Reader in Economics at the University of Sussex. Michael Gasiorek is Co-Director of the UKTPO, Co-Director of the CITP and Professor of Economics at the University of Sussex. Emily Lydgate is Co-Director of the UKTPO and Professor of Environmental Law at the University of Sussex. L. Alan Winters is Co-Director of the CITP and former Director of the UKTPO. A general election is underway, and the parties are making various promises and commitments to attract voters, and both the main parties – the Conservatives and Labour – are keen to persuade the country that they have a credible plan. Now it might just be that the authors of this piece are trade nerds, but one key aspect of economic policy has not yet been clearly articulated, or even mentioned – and that is international trade policy. In our view, this is a mistake. As a hugely successful open economy, international trade constitutes a significant share of economic activity, supports over 6 million jobs in the UK, spurs innovation, and enhances consumption choices. [...]

By , , , |2025-01-15T12:06:48+00:0030 May 2024|UK - Non EU, UK- EU|6 Comments
Read More

Our home

University of Sussex Logo

© 2024 UK Trade Policy Observatory

Site by: Phipps Design

Go to Top