In order to understand which ideology the world trade regime is more based on, it is important to analyze the existence of both in this current world. Reciprocity is the idea that one acts in response to the other's action. There are usually two situations of trade related to this idea. One is when two states make an agreement to reduce each other's trade barriers. The other is when one state impose trade barriers on the other in response to the trade barriers imposed by the other. Both of these are directly related to the laws of the World Trade Organization, and in fact, the laws created by WTO are only enforceable through state's interests caused by reciprocity. This means that WTO's success is an important factor in understanding reciprocity's influence on world trade. The WTO has 160 member states. A major rule it is based on is the most favored nation principle, which is a principle that all members are required to follow and that all members benefit from. It states that the tariff a state imposed on its most favored nation must be imposed equally on all other members of WTO. This principle shows a great effect of reciprocity, because it is a principle of which state receives benefit by acting for the collective interest. Another WTO rule is that it allows state to impose retaliatory tariffs equal to the losses caused by another state's unfair trade practices. In 2013, for example, Antigua and Barbuda was allowed to legally steal $21 million from US, because US blocked it's online gambling sites.
Unlike Reciprocity, where states benefit or injure equally, dominance is the idea that one state has the power to decide and usually benefits the most. In terms of trade, dominance would be when a state doesn't have the ability to return the economic damage made by another state either by tariffs or subsidies. The most major example will be the large agricultural subsidies made by richer countries to keep domestic agricultural products such as coffee low enough to compete with those imported from poorer countries. This harms the farmers in Global South a lot, but the states can't retaliate, because they don't have enough money for subsidies, and they are too dependent on the richer's states' products to put tariffs on them.
By comparing the existence of dominance and reciprocity, it can be said that trade regimes is based more on reciprocity than dominance. Even though poorer countries agricultural exports are extremely limited through richer countries's dominance, there wouldn't have been so much trade today without the WTO, bilateral agreements, and free Trade Areas, which are all based on reciprociy.
Unlike Reciprocity, where states benefit or injure equally, dominance is the idea that one state has the power to decide and usually benefits the most. In terms of trade, dominance would be when a state doesn't have the ability to return the economic damage made by another state either by tariffs or subsidies. The most major example will be the large agricultural subsidies made by richer countries to keep domestic agricultural products such as coffee low enough to compete with those imported from poorer countries. This harms the farmers in Global South a lot, but the states can't retaliate, because they don't have enough money for subsidies, and they are too dependent on the richer's states' products to put tariffs on them.
By comparing the existence of dominance and reciprocity, it can be said that trade regimes is based more on reciprocity than dominance. Even though poorer countries agricultural exports are extremely limited through richer countries's dominance, there wouldn't have been so much trade today without the WTO, bilateral agreements, and free Trade Areas, which are all based on reciprociy.