IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ordojb/v57y2006i1p315-340n18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Argumente für und wider die Reziprozität in der WTO – Die Reziprozität als merkantilistisches Erbe in der geltenden Welthandelsordnung / The merits of reciprocity in the WTO

Author

Listed:
  • Senti Richard

Abstract

Reciprocity is one of the main features of the current world trade system. Other principles of the system, as anchored in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), include most favoured nation and national treatment. This contribution addresses the question as to whether a negotiating strategy based on reciprocity is in conflict with a world trade system founded on principles of equality and mutuality. Adopting a reciprocal approach allows the stronger negotiating partner to succeed in relation to its own goals and to grow - all at the cost of the weaker negotiating partner. The first part examines the various definitions of reciprocity and shows how the principle has moved through the Cordell Hull programme into the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and its successor organisation, the WTO. The conclusion offered from the analysis is to the effect that reciprocity, as rooted in the WTO, cannot be justified, whether on an economic basis or on a foreign trade basis, and that it shows elements of mercantilism. The only people who support negotiations through which the thread of reciprocity flows, are politicians and diplomats. The article concludes with the proposal that the principle of reciprocity should be removed from the WTO arena.

Suggested Citation

  • Senti Richard, 2006. "Argumente für und wider die Reziprozität in der WTO – Die Reziprozität als merkantilistisches Erbe in der geltenden Welthandelsordnung / The merits of reciprocity in the WTO," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 57(1), pages 315-340, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ordojb:v:57:y:2006:i:1:p:315-340:n:18
    DOI: 10.1515/ordo-2006-0118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ordo-2006-0118
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ordo-2006-0118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anonymous, 1948. "International Trade Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 537-537, September.
    2. Keohane, Robert O., 1986. "Reciprocity in international relations," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 1-27, January.
    3. Anonymous, 1948. "International Trade Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 365-373, June.
    4. Rhodes, Carolyn, 1989. "Reciprocity in trade: the utility of a bargaining strategy," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 273-299, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Avidan Kent, 2014. "Implementing the principle of policy integration: institutional interplay and the role of international organizations," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 203-224, September.
    2. Barbara Dluhosch & Daniel Horgos, 2013. "(When) Does Tit-for-tat Diplomacy in Trade Policy Pay Off?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 155-179, February.
    3. Sebastian Krapohl & Václav Ocelík & Dawid M. Walentek, 2021. "The instability of globalization: applying evolutionary game theory to global trade cooperation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 31-51, July.
    4. David A. Steinberg & Yeling Tan, 2023. "Public responses to foreign protectionism: Evidence from the US-China trade war," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 145-167, January.
    5. Paasman, Berend R., 1999. "Multilateral rules on competition policy: an overview of the debate," Comercio Internacional 4369, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    6. Ish Puneet Singh, 2009. "Trade and Precaution: Their Progressive Interlace," American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Science Publications, vol. 1(4), pages 320-333, December.
    7. Ludmila Štěrbová, 2013. "Investment Regulatory Environment and the European Union [Investiční regulatorní prostředí a Evropská unie]," Současná Evropa, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2013(2), pages 67-85.
    8. Paidipaty, Poornima & Ramos Pinto, Pedro, 2021. "Revisiting the “Great Levelling”: the limits of Piketty’s Capital and Ideology for understanding the rise of late 20th century inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110941, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Irish Maureen, 2011. "Special and Differential Treatment, Trade and Sustainable Development," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 72-98, February.
    10. F.M. Scherer, 1997. "Competition Policy Convergence: Where Next?," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 24(1), pages 5-19, January.
    11. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath & Thomas Bernauer & Jaehyun Song & Azusa Uji, 2021. "Understanding public support for domestic contributions to global collective goods," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    12. Richard Senti, 1986. "Protektionismus in der grenzüberschreitenden Versicherungstätigkeit," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 122(III), pages 471-498, September.
    13. Tisdell, Clement A., 2000. "Globalisation and the WTO: Attitudes Expressed by Pressure Groups and by Less Developed Countries," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48003, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    14. Cymbal, W. & Veeman, M.M., 1994. "Canadian Agriculture and GATT: An Economic Analysis of Article XI," Project Report Series 232387, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    15. James Scott & Rorden Wilkinson, 2012. "Changing of the guard: expert knowledge and ‘common sense’ in the Doha Development Agenda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 16612, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    16. T. N. Srinivasan, 2007. "The Dispute Settlement Mechanism of the WTO: A Brief History and an Evaluation from Economic, Contractarian and Legal Perspectives," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 1033-1068, July.
    17. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    18. Jin Mun Jeong & Dursun Peksen, 2019. "Domestic Institutional Constraints, Veto Players, and Sanction Effectiveness," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 194-217, January.
    19. Matera Paulina & Matera Rafał, 2019. "Why does cooperation work or fail? The case of EU-US sanction policy against Iran," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 25(85), pages 30-62, November.
    20. Las Heras, Mireia & Bosch, Maria José & Raes, Anneloes M.L., 2015. "Sequential mediation among family friendly culture and outcomes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2366-2373.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ordojb:v:57:y:2006:i:1:p:315-340:n:18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.