Abstract
AbstractThe commonplace tendency is to blame the difficulties of the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations on the World Trade Organization (WTO) itself. In contrast, I suggest in the first section of this article that exogenous structural factors, especially changing commodity prices and trade flows, fatally undermined the Round. In the second section, I discount the significance of endogenous institutional factors such as the number of participants, the size of the agenda, or the Single Undertaking, although design failures, notably in the ‘modalities’ for negotiation, did hurt. But what hurt even more was the way the WTO, in common with most multilateral organizations, has not caught up with the shifting centre of gravity in global governance. The trading system is no longer a transatlantic bargain. The regulatory issues on the twenty-first century trade policy agenda will inevitably be negotiated in Geneva, but only after a new trans-Pacific accommodation recognizes China's central role.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Economics and Econometrics
Reference28 articles.
1. Brink L. (2013), ‘Trends in Agricultural Domestic Support Worldwide and Sustainable Development Implications’, paper delivered to the ICTSD workshop on Agricultural Trade Policy and Sustainable Development: Experience from India and Other Countries, New Delhi, India, 17 April 2013, http://ictsd.org/downloads/2013/04/ds-trends-ictsd-delhi-17-april-2013.pdf.
2. The WTO Single Undertaking as Negotiating Technique and Constitutive Metaphor
Cited by
38 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献