Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute
Identification
- Clé publique
- openalex:w195843428
- Auteurs
- Joseph A. McKinney
- Année déclarée
- 2004
- Langue déclarée
- en
- Type source
- article
- Première détection
- 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- Dernière observation des métadonnées
- 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- Dernière vérification HTTP
- Non effectuée
Résumé documentaire — langue originale
The United States and Canada enjoy the benefits of the world's largest bilateral trading relationship. The United States accounts for about eighty percent of Canada's total foreign trade, and Canada accounts for more than twenty percent of the goods and services trade of the United States. The two-way trade amounts to well over U.S.$1 billion per day. For the most part this trade flows smoothly and frictions concerning it rarely arise. However, United States-Canada trade is plagued by recurrent disputes within natural resource industries--the most important and persistent of these disputes is that concerning trade in softwood lumber. The intractability of this dispute is rooted in differences in ownership and management of natural resources in the United States and Canada, which in turn are reflections of different attitudes toward the role of the state in the two countries. Because these differences are unlikely to change within the foreseeable future, a permanent solution to the softwood lumber dispute is unlikely. The greatest hope for resolution is continued integration of the United States and Canadian softwood lumber industries. However, whether even increased integration of the industries can resolve the dispute is uncertain so long as differences in ownership and management of natural resources in the two countries persist. I. BACKGROUND Softwood lumber trade between the United States and Canada has been a matter of some contention from the time that the Canadian Constitution gave provinces the rights to forest resources in 1867. (1) While arguments on both sides have taken on increased sophistication during the past quarter-century, the dispute is rooted in the longstanding structural differences in the Canadian and United States forestry industries. Some historical perspective reveals that attempts to restrict softwood lumber imports into the United States are nothing new. For a brief period of time in the mid-nineteenth century free trade in softwood lumber between the United States and Canada existed by virtue of the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 which provided for the free entrance into either country of natural products and unmanufactured raw material from the other. (Lower, 1938) However, the United States abrogated the Reciprocity Treaty in 1866 and imposed a twenty percent tariff on Canadian lumber, which was countered by a Canadian export tax of one dollar per thousand feet on pine logs (later increased to two dollars). (Lower, 1938) In 1890 the United States reduced its tariff by one-half in return for Canada's removing its export tax on logs which were desired as inputs by the United States lumber industry. For a brief period from 1894 to 1897, free trade again prevailed between the United States and Canada in lumber products. However, with the Dingley Tariff of 1897 the United States lumber industry succeeded in having a $2 per thousand board feet import tariff on lumber reimposed. (Lower, 1938) Early in the twentieth century the United States proposed another reciprocity treaty providing for free trade in natural resource products, but this time Canada rejected the proposal. In the Underwood-Simmons Tariff Act of 1913, despite pressures for continued protection by the domestic lumber industry, the United States Congress removed the tariff from softwood lumber. (Braudo and Trebilcock, 2002) This situation did not last for long, however. The Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922 established an average tariff rate on Wood and manufactures at 7.97 percent. (Taussig, 1931) The Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930 placed a specific tariff of $1 per thousand board feet on softwood lumber. (2) This act was amended in 1932 to raise the rate to almost twenty-five percent ad valorem equivalent, with severe economic impact on the Canadian industry. The tariff was reduced by about one-half by a trade pact agreed in 1935. (Reed, 2001) Subsequent trade negotiations reduced the tariff further so that by the 1950s the rate of protection was relatively low. …
Identifiants
- OPENALEX
- W195843428
Repères documentaires
- Famille documentaire
- Doctrine
- Types déclarés par les sources
- article
- Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites
- CA
- Entités naturelles mentionnées
- Forêt
Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.
Sources
OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2
- Document · https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/capp/article/view/16475
- OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W195843428
Provenance des champs documentaires
Les valeurs étayées et les valeurs de provenance non résolue sont séparées. Une provenance bibliographique ne valide aucune affirmation juridique.
- Titre
- Étayé par une source documentaire
- Publication
- Étayé par une source documentaire
- Auteurs
- Étayé par une source documentaire
- Type documentaire
- Étayé par une source documentaire
- Juridiction
- Sujet étudié dérivé du contexte documentaire explicite
- Cour
- Non renseigné
- Autorité émettrice
- Non renseigné
- Éditeur
- Non renseigné
- DOI
- Non renseigné
- ISBN
- Non renseigné
- Identifiant officiel
- Non renseigné
- URL source
- Étayé par une source documentaire
- Statut déclaré par la source
- Non renseigné
- Modification / abrogation
- Non renseigné
Citer cette référence
Joseph A. McKinney. Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute. 2004. https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-c59a1c7da7282685b24788b847e35cbe/
JSON · CSL-JSON · BibTeX · RIS · CSV · JSON-LD ·
APA, Chicago, ISO 690 : formats bibliographiques fondés sur les champs disponibles. OSCOLA / Bluebook : données structurées uniquement ; aucune conformité juridique complète n’est revendiquée sans vérification des éléments nécessaires.
- APA
- Joseph A. McKinney. (2004). Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute. https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-c59a1c7da7282685b24788b847e35cbe/
- Chicago
- Joseph A. McKinney. Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute. 2004. https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-c59a1c7da7282685b24788b847e35cbe/
- ISO 690
- Joseph A. McKinney. Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute. 2004. https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-c59a1c7da7282685b24788b847e35cbe/
UDTR — Bibliothèque juridique mondiale des droits de la Nature. Political Economy of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute. Notice documentaire: https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-c59a1c7da7282685b24788b847e35cbe/ · Dernière vérification HTTP : non effectuée
Provenance par champ et version de la notice
Version 8d6071ded0e8ef7d · udtr-reference-1.1.2
- Titre
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- Auteurs
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- Année
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- Identifiants
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- URL source
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
- ORCID déclarés des auteurs
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
L’historique porte sur les métadonnées de la notice, sans certifier l’état du droit.
20f553d679b3fa27 · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
cb3fe351758d4022 · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
1c9f7815d8d437da · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
8d6071ded0e8ef7d · 2026-11-09T19:14:42.766502+00:00
Données de cette version figée
Dossiers et relations documentaires
CA ·
Rôles des sources
Source de découverte · https://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/capp/article/view/16475
Source de découverte · https://openalex.org/W195843428
Un lien vers une autorité ne prouve pas à lui seul une affirmation juridique. Les résumés et les textes intégraux restent soumis aux conditions de leur source.
Statut documentaire
Pertinence à examiner
Bibliothèque
Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.