Le choc de la Chine, la montée du nationalisme, la crise climatique, la pandémie de Covid-19, l'invasion russe de l'Ukraine et le retour de Donald Trump à la Maison Blanche ont tous une conséquence commune pour le système commercial international : ils ont conduit à une refonte majeure des politiques commerciales et de leurs relations avec d'autres domaines politiques. Tout d'abord, l'ascension fulgurante de la Chine en tant que premier producteur et exportateur mondial de produits industriels a entraîné un mouvement tectonique de la politique et l'économie mondiales, avec des effets socio-économiques dramatiques qui ont été – et continuent d'être – ressentis dans tous les pays industrialisés (Autor et al. 2013 ; Autor 2023 ; Autor 2024). Cela a eu trois conséquences notables sur les liens de la politique commerciale. Premièrement, l’afflux d’importations chinoises a redéfini les liens entre la politique nationale et la politique internationale en mettant à mal le consensus politique sur la libéralisation des échanges et le libre marché, au profit d’une résurgence de l'interventionnisme économique sous de multiples formes, comme le protectionnisme ou de nouvelles politiques industrielles (Bulfone, 2023 ; Criscuolo et al., 2022 ; McNamara, 2023 ; Velut 2024). Deuxièmement, et parallèlement, les effets perturbateurs du choc chinois ont été largement instrumentalisés à des fins électorales, conduisant les gouvernements à associer le discours protectionniste à une rhétorique nativiste (Noland, 2020 ; Polaski et al. 2020 ; Velut, 2018). Ces nouveaux liens entre commerce et migration ont normalisé le nationalisme économique. Troisièmement, l'intensification de la concurrence entre les grandes puissances a contribué à l’émergence – ou plus exactement la résurgence – de la « géopolitisation » ou « sécuritisation » du commerce, où les intérêts sécuritaires et économiques sont de plus en plus étroitement liés. La concurrence géoéconomique s'est traduite par une diversification des instruments de politique commerciale. Les pays se sont éloignés des accords de libre-échange (ALE) traditionnels pour se tourner vers une liste toujours plus longue de restrictions à l’exportation, de contrôles des investissements et d'autres politiques dites autonomes ou unilatérales, de « mini-accords » sectoriels parmi lesquels des accords sur les minéraux critiques, des protocoles d'accord et des partenariats stratégiques (Cernat, 2023 ; De Ville, Happersberger & Kalimo, 2023 ; Garcia-Duran, Eliasson & Costa, 2023 ; Claussen, 2023). L'invasion russe de l'Ukraine a renforcé les liens entre commerce et sécurité et contribué à la diversification des politiques commerciales, notamment avec l’imposition d’un éventail sans précédent de sanctions économiques allant des interdictions d'importation aux restrictions à l'exportation et au gel des avoirs. Autre illustration de la complexité croissante des liens commerciaux, la pandémie de Covid-19 a contraint les décideurs à reconsidérer les tensions et les conflits entre les objectifs commerciaux, sanitaires et de sécurité nationale face aux urgences de santé publique et aux goulets d'étranglement des chaînes d'approvisionnement. Cette crise a marqué une rupture avec les politiques commerciales purement axées sur le marché, comme l'illustrent l'intervention sans précédent des gouvernements dans le développement des vaccins et la résurgence du commerce réglementé, mais aussi la montée du « populisme sanitaire » ou du « nationalisme vaccinal », qui ont privilégié les intérêts nationaux au détriment de la coopération internationale et de la santé publique (Baldwin & Evenett 2020 ; Bown 2022 ; Bollyky & Bown 2020 ; Dalingwater 2023). Les questions environnementales et climatiques ne sont pas à l'abri de la nouvelle politique du nationalisme économique, créant de nouvelles tensions entre les objectifs commerciaux, sécuritaires et de durabilité dans le cadre d'un nouveau trilemme. D'une part, les questions environnementales sont progressivement passées d'une considération secondaire à la partie intégrante d'un nexus commerce-environnement cherchant à concilier …
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Aaronson, S. (2018). The Turn to Trade Policies to Regulate the Internet. in J.B. Velut, L. Dalingwater, V. Boullet & V. Peyronel (Eds.). Understanding Mega Free Trade Agreements. The Political and Economic Governance of New Cross-Regionalism (pp. 191-220). Routledge.
- Aaronson, S. (2001). Taking Trade to the Streets. The Lost History of Public Efforts to Shape Globalization. The University of Michigan Press.
- Aaronson S. & A. Zable (2023). Missing Persons. The Case of National AI Strategies. CIGI Papers No. 283, Center for International Governance Innovation, available at: https://www.cigionline.org/static/documents/no.283_web.pdf
- Adler-Nissen, R. (2014), Opting Out of the European Union: Diplomacy, Sovereignty and European Integration (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
- Aggarwal, V. (2013). “US Free Trade Agreements and Linkages” . International Negotiations , 18(1), 89–110.
- Ahnlid, A. (2013). The Trade Do-Gooder: Linkages in EU Free Trade Negotiations, in V. Aggarwal & K. Govella (Eds.), Linking Trade and Security (pp. 201-221). Springer.
- Alons, G., & Zwaan, P. (2026). “Inclusion or exclusion of external voices in decision-making on the EU regulation on deforestation-free products (EUDR): Heard, but not listened to.” Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30236
- Autor, D., et al. (2016). “The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade.” Annual Review of Economics, 8, 205–240.
- Autor, D. & G. Hanson (2025). “We Warned About the First China Shock. The Next One Will Be Worse. The New York Times , 14 July.
- Azmeh, S., Foster, C. & Echavarri, J. (2020). The International Trade Regime and the Quest for Free Digital Trade. International Studies Review , 2, 671-692.
- Bacchus, J. (2022). Trade Links. New Rules for a New World . Cambridge University Press.
- Baldwin, R. & S. Evenett (eds.) (2020). Covid-19 and Trade Policy. Why Turning Inward Won’t Work. CEPR Press.
- Baker P., Friel, S., Schram, A. and Labonte, R. (2016). Trade and investment liberalization, food systems change and highly processed food consumption : a natural experiment contrasting the soft drink markets of Peru and Bolivi, Global Health , 12, (24). <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4890476/>.
- Bollyky T. & C. Bown (2020). “The Tragedy of Vaccine Nationalism,” Foreign Affairs (September/October).
- Boulanger, E., M. Rioux et S. Zini (2021), Vers une politique commerciale socialement responsable dans un contexte de tensions commerciales. Presses de l’Université du Québec.
- Bown, C. (2022). “COVID-19 vaccine supply chains and the Defense Production Act.” Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) Working Paper 22-9.
- Broschek, J., & Goff, P. (ed.) (2020). The Multilevel Politics of Trade. University of Toronto Press.
- Bulfone, Fabio, “Industrial Policy and Comparative Political economy: A Literature Review and Research Agenda,” Competition & Change, vol. 27, n°1, 2023, p. 22-43
- Cernat, Lucian. (2023). “The Art of the Mini-Deals: The Invisible Part of EU Trade Policy.” ECIPE Policy Brief 11.
- Chase, K. (2003). Economic Interests and Regional Trading Arrangements: The Case of Nafta, International Organization, 57(1), 137-74.
- Claussen, Kathleen (2022). ”Trade's Mini-Deals,” Virginia Journal of International Law 62: 315-382.
- Comont, A. (2026). “Plurilateralism within the WTO as a catalyst for new trade linkages: An analysis of the JSI on e-commerce.” Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30105
- Conti, J. (2016), ‘Expertise through experience: Inequality and legitimacy in the juridification of international trade disputing’, in E. Hannah, J. Scott and S. Trommer (eds), Expert Knowledge in Global Trade (Abingdon: Routledge), pp. 85-106.
- Criscuolo, Chiara, et al., "An Industrial Policy Framework for OECD Countries: Old Debates, New Perspectives," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers , n° 127, Paris: Éditions OCDE, available online: https://doi.org/10.1787/0002217c-en , p. 4 (last accessed on December 13, 2023).
- Dalingwater, L. (2023), “Embedded Liberalism and Health Populism in the UK in a Post-Truth Era,” Politics and Governance , https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i1.5923 .
- Dalingwater, L. (2020). Universal health care and the limits to a Canadian-style Progressive Trade Agenda», Stéphane Paquin et Hubert Rioux (dir.), “Numéro thématique : L’agenda progressiste et les négociations commerciales internationales,” Interventions Economiques/ Papers in Political Economy , Université de Quebec à Montréal, Canada, 65, 2020.
- Dalingwater, L. (2026). “Furthering trade and investment in India’s healthcare sector: What cost to the public health care system?” Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30321
- Destler, I. M., & Balint, P.. (1999). The New Politics of American Trade: Trade, Labor, and the Environment . Institute for International Economics.
- De Ville, F. & Gheyle, N. (2022) Small Firms as the Main Beneficiaries of Trade Agreements? A Framing Analysis of European Commission Discourse. New Political Economy , 27(4), 553-566.
- De Ville, Ferdi, Simon Happersberger, & Harri Kalimo (2023), 'The Unilateral Turn in EU Trade Policy? The Origins and Characteristics of the EU’s New Trade Instruments', European Foreign Affairs Review , vol. 28, p. 15-34.
- Elgin, C. (2026). “The role of informality in shaping economic policy integration.” Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30331
- Fahey, E. (2022). The EU as a Global Digital Actor. Institutionalising Global Data Protection, Trade and Cybersecurity. Hart Publishing.
- Farrell, H. and Newman, A.L. (2019). Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security , 44 (1), 42-79.
- Gammage, C. (2025), 'Trade law as countermovements: A socio-legal analysis of the relationship between trade, development and human rights', in S.E. Rolland (ed.), Research Handbook on Trade Law and Development (Cheltenham: Edgward Elgar), pp. 9-24, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035325962.00011
- Garcia-Duran, Patricia, L. Johan Eliasson, L., & Oriol Costa (2023). Commerce and Security Meet in the European Union’s Trade Defence Instruments. Politics and Governance, 11(4), 165-176.
- Hannah, E. (2016). NGOs and Global Trade. Non-state voices in EU trade policymaking. Routledge.
- Hoekman, B. and A. Bondi, Arianna (2022). Non-trade Objectives and EU External Policy: Survey Responses on RESPECT Research Findings. Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper No. 2022/12.
- Gleeson, D. and Labonté, R. (2020), Trade Agreements and Public Health (Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan).
- Goff, P. (2021). Inclusive Trade: Justice, Innovation, or More of the Same? Ethics & International Affairs, 35 (2), 273-301.
- Goff, P. (ed) (2021). Trade and Culture. The Ongoing Debate. Routledge.
- Grossman, G. M. & E. Helpman (2018), “Identity Politics and Trade Policy “, NBER Working Paper 25348, Cambridge, National Bureau of Economic Research.
- Hannah, E., Roberts, A. and Trommer, S. (2022), ‘Gender in global trade: Transforming or reproducing trade orthodoxy?’, Review of International Political Economy , 29 (4), pp. 1368-93.
- Hirono, K., Haigh, F., Gleeson, D., Harris, P., Thow, A. M., & Friel, S. (2016). Is health impact assessment useful in the context of trade negotiations? A case study of the trans pacific partnership agreement. BMJ Open, 6(4), e010339.
- Hughes, S. and Wilkinson, R. (1998), ‘International labour standards and world trade: No role for the World Trade Organization?’, New Political Economy , 3 (3), pp. 375-89.
- Jasanoff, S. (2003), ‘Breaking the Waves in Science Studies: Comment on H.M. Collins and Robert Evans, “The Third Wave of Science Studies”’, Social Studies of Science , 33 (3), pp. 389-400.
- Jasanoff, S. (2011), ‘The Practices of Objectivity in Regulatory Science’, in C. Camic, N. Gross and M. Lamont (eds), Social Knowledge in the Making (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 307-38.
- Jasanoff, S. (2012), Science and Public Reason (Abingdon: Routledge).
- Jinnah, S. & J.-F. Morin (2020). Greening Through Trade. How American Trade Policy Is Linked to Environmental Protection Abroad. Cambridge, The MIT Press.
- Jones, Emily & Christopher Adam (2023), “New frontiers of trade and trade policy: digitalization and climate change,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy , Volume 39, Issue 1, Spring 2023, Pages 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grac048
- Kanchanachitra, C., Lindelow, M., Johnston, T. et al. (2011), ‘Human resources for health in southeast Asia: shortages, distributional challenges, and international trade in health services’, The Lancet , 377 (9767), pp. 769-81.
- Kay, T. & Evans, R. (2018). Trade Battles. Activism and the Politicization of International Trade Policy. Oxford University Press.
- Kolben, K. & M. Rioux (2023). “Re‐Embedding Trade in the Shadow of Populism,” special issue in Politics and Governance .
- Lang, A.T.F. (2011), World Trade Law after Neoliberalism: Re-Imagining the Global Economic Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
- Lang, A.T.F. (2016), ‘The double movement of law and expertise’, in E. Hannah, J. Scott and S. Trommer (eds), Expert Knowledge in Global Trade (Abingdon: Routledge), pp. 124-48.
- Laurens, N., C. Brand & J.-F. Morin (2022) "Climate and Trade Policies: From Silos to Integration" Climate Policy 22(2): 248-253.
- Lequesne, C., & Paquin, S. (2017). Federalism, Paradiplomacy and Foreign Policy: A Case of Mutual Neglect. International Negotiation , 22(1), 183-204.
- Lester, S. & H. Zhu (2019).” A Proposal for “Rebalancing” to Deal with “National Security” Trade Restrictions.” Fordham International Law Journal 42(5), 1451-1474.
- Ly, Van Anh. (2026). Environment protection in trade agreements: A critical and constructive view to RCEP. Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30055
- Lunt, N. Smith, R. Exworthy, M.; Green, S.; Horsfall, D.; Mannion, R. Medical Tourism: Treatments, Markets and Health System Implications: A scoping review.Paris : OECD, 2011.
- Martens, D., & J. Orbie (2018). “The European Union and fair trade : hands-off?” In S. Khorana & M. Garcia (Eds.), Handbook on the EU and international trade (pp. 281–295). Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Martineau, T., Decker, K., Bundred, P. (2004), ‘“Brain drain” of health professionals: from rhetoric to responsible action’, Health Policy , 70 (1), pp. 1-10.
- McNamara, Kathleen R., “Transforming Europe? The EU's Industrial Policy and Geopolitical Turn,” Journal of European Public Policy , 2023.
- Miller, D. (2017). 'Fair Trade: What Does It Mean and Why Does Matter? Journal of Moral Philosophy , 14 , pp. 249-269.
- Muzaka, V. (2009). “Shaping global rules: Proprietary pharmaceutical companies as global political actors.” New Political Economy , 14(2), 289-301.
- Noland, M. (2020). “Protectionism under Trump: The China Shock, Deplorables, and the First White President”, Asian Economic Policy Review , 15(1), 31-50. DOI : https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12274
- Orbie, J. (2021). “'EU Trade Policy Meets Geopolitics: What About Trade Justice?', European Foreign Affairs Review 26(2), pp. 197-202.
- Pinchis-Paulsen, M. (2022). “Let’s Agree to Disagree: A Strategy for Trade-Security” Journal of International Economic Law, 25(4), 527-547.
- Pouliot, V. and Adler, E. (2011), ‘International Practices: Introduction and Framework’, in E. Adler and V. Pouliot (eds), International Practices (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 3-35.
- Ravenhill, J. (2017). “The political economy of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: a “21st Century” trade agreement?”, New Political Economy, 22(5), 573-594.
- Rhodes, T. and Lancaster, K. (2019), ‘Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing’, Social Science & Medicine , 238, pp. 1-12.
- Rioux, M. & Verdugo (2019). “Digital Trade and Cultural Policy Nexus” in L. Albornoz & M. Garcia Leiva (eds.), Audio-Visual Industries and Diversity. Routledge.
- Rioux, M. (2022). La découvrabilité va-t-elle devenir essentielle pour se frayer un chemin dans notre monde hyperconnecté ?. Nectart, 15, 22-30. https://www.cairn.info/revue--2022-2-page-22.htm.
- Rioux, M., & L’homme, C.-O. (2026). From linkages to disconnects? The rapid response mechanism (RRM) under the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA). Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30222
- Roberts, A., & Trommer, S. (2026). Gendered trade governance during Covid-19. Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/29977
- Ruckert, A., Schram, A., Labonté, R., Friel, S., Gleeson, D., & Thow, A. M. (2016). Policy coherence, health and the sustainable development goals: A health impact assessment of the Trans-Pacific partnership. Critical Public Health, 27(1), 86–96
- Schiavon, J. (2020). Comparative Paradiplomacy . Routledge.
- Schram, A., Labonté, R., Baker, P., Friel, S., Reeves, A., & Stuckler, D. (2015). The role of trade and investment liberalization in the sugar-sweetened carbonated beverages market: A natural experiment contrasting Vietnam and the Philippines. Globalization and Health, 11(1), 41.
- Sell, S., & Prakash, A. (2004). Using ideas strategically: The contest between business and NGO networks in intellectual property rights. International Studies Quarterly, 48(1), 143-175.
- Serrano Burbano, N. (2026). Indigenous participation: Canada’s trade for reconciliation. Papers in Political Economy/Revue Interventions économiques, 75. http://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/30174
- Siles-Brügge, G. and Strange, M. (2020), ‘National Autonomy or Transnational Solidarity? Using Multiple Geographic Frames to Politicize EU Trade Policy’, Politics and Governance , 8 (1), pp. 277-89.
- Smith, R. D. (2012). Health Systems in Low and middle-income countries : An economic and policy perspective, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 288 pages.
- Stiglitz, J. E. (2006). Making Globalization Work. New York: W.W. Norton.
- Thow, A.M., Gleeson, D. (2017). Advancing public health on the changing global trade and investment agenda : Comment on The trans-pacific partnership : is it everything we feared for health ? Int J Health Policy Manag. 6(5),295–298.
- Thow, A. M., Snowden, W., Labonté, R., Gleeson, D., Stucker, D., Hattersley, L., … Friel, S. (2015). Will the next generation of preferential trade and investment agreements undermine prevention of noncommunicable diseases? A prospective policy analysis of the trans Pacific partnership Agreement. Health Policy, 119, 88–96.
- Townsend, B., et al. (2019), ‘How do actors with asymmetrical power assert authority in policy agenda-setting? A study of authority claims by health actors in trade policy’, Social Science & Medicine , 236, 112430.
- Townsend, B., et al. (2020), ‘How does policy framing enable or constrain inclusion of social determinants of health and health equity on trade policy agendas?’, Critical Public Health , 30 (1), 115-26.
- UNCTAD (2023). “COP28: First-ever ‘Trade Day’ puts focus on trade in climate action.” Available from: https://unctad.org/news/cop28-first-ever-trade-day-puts-focus-trade-climate-action
- UN Environment Programme (n.d.). “Environment & Trade Hub,” available from: https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/green-economy/what-we-do/environment-trade-hub?_ga=2.234368670.1680483441.1718632014-1960108012.1718632014
- Velut, J.B., Siles-Brügge, G. & Dalingwater, L. (2022). Rethinking the Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion in Trade Politics, New Political Economy, 27(4), 547-552.
- Velut, J.-B. (2022). “Environmental allies and trade competitors: a comparative analysis of US and EU governance models for the trade-and-climate nexus” in E. Fahey & I. Mancini (eds.), Understanding the EU as a ‘Good’ Global Governance Actor . Edward Elgar: 74-90.
- Velut, J.B. et al. with LSE Consulting (2022b), " Comparative analysis of trade and sustainable development provisions in trade agreements " , LSE Consulting: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2022/february/tradoc_160043.pdf
- Velut, J.-B. (2023). “Trade Linkages or Disconnects? Labor Rights and Data Privacy in US Digital Trade Policy.” Politics and Governance .
- Velut , J.-B. (2024). Whose Industrial Policy? Assessing the Democratic Credentials of Washington’s New Competitive Strategy. Politique américaine , 42, 123-156. https://doi.org/10.3917/polam.042.0123
- Weiss, Mark (2015). Trading Health ? UK Faculty of Public Health Policy. Report on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, London, UK Faculty of Public Health.
- Wolfe, R. (2005), ‘See You in Geneva? Legal (Mis)Representations of the Trading System’, European Journal of International Relations , 11 (3), pp. 339-65.

