IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/9780.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Doha Round Impasse: A Graphical Account

Author

Listed:
  • Evenett, Simon

Abstract

Several factors potentially responsible for the failure to conclude the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations are analysed. A two-stage negotiation and ratification game between the ?North? (industrialised countries) and the ?South? (developing countries) is employed and collapses into a single diagram. The choice of negotiating agenda, principles, and currency of the Doha Round interact with domestic political factors in leading WTO members, the fast growth of exports prior to 2007, and pervasive unilateral trade reform to eliminate the ?landing zone? for this particular multilateral negotiation. Recent emphasis on differences between developing countries and on Chinese WTO accession as independent causes of the impasse seems misplaced.

Suggested Citation

  • Evenett, Simon, 2013. "The Doha Round Impasse: A Graphical Account," CEPR Discussion Papers 9780, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP9780
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné, 2011. "Economic Impact of Potential Outcome of the DDA," Working Papers 2011-23, CEPII research center.
    2. Faizel Ismail, 2012. "Is the Doha Round Dead? What is the Way Forward?," World Economics, World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 13(3), pages 143-170, July.
    3. I. M. Destler, 2005. "American Trade Politics 4th Edition," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 3829, October.
    4. Bernard Hoekman, 2008. "The General Agreement on Trade in Services: Doomed to Fail? Does it Matter?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 295-318, December.
    5. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/8241 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Putnam, Robert D., 1988. "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 427-460, July.
    7. Frank Ackerman & Kevin Gallagher, 2008. "The Shrinking Gains from Global Trade Liberalization in Computable General Equilibrium Models: A Critical Assessment," International Journal of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 50-77.
    8. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott & Woan Foong Wong, 2010. "Figuring Out the Doha Round," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number pa91, October.
    9. Robert Wolfe, 2013. "First diagnose, then treat: what ails the Doha Round?," RSCAS Working Papers 2013/85, European University Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernard Hoekman, 2014. "The Bali Trade Facilitation Agreement and Rulemaking in the WTO: Milestone, Mistake or Mirage?," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/102, European University Institute.
    2. Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné, 2014. "What next for the DDA? Quantifying the role of negotiation modalities," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/61, European University Institute.
    3. Robert Wolfe, 2013. "First diagnose, then treat: what ails the Doha Round?," RSCAS Working Papers 2013/85, European University Institute.
    4. Peter Egger & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2014. "Introduction to the special issue on the political economy of multilateral trade negotiations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 135-142, June.
    5. Decreux, Yvan & Fontagnã‰, Lionel, 2015. "What Next for Multilateral Trade Talks? Quantifying the Role of Negotiation Modalities," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 29-43, January.
    6. Bernard Hoekman, 2014. "The Bali Trade Facilitation Agreement and Rulemaking in the WTO: Milestone, Mistake or Mirage?," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/102, European University Institute.
    7. Stephen, Matthew D. & Parízek, Michal, 2019. "New Powers and the Distribution of Preferences in Global Trade Governance: From Deadlock and Drift to Fragmentation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(6), pages 735-758.
    8. Ingo Rohlfing & Tobias Schafföner, 2019. "The time-varying relationship between economic globalization and the ideological center of gravity of party systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-26, February.

    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. Bosworth, Barry & Collins, Susan M., 2010. "Rebalancing the US Economy in a Postcrisis World," ADBI Working Papers 236, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    2. Jeronim Capaldo, 2014. "Trade Hallucination: Risks of Trade Facilitation and Suggestions for Implementation," GDAE Working Papers 14-02, GDAE, Tufts University.
    3. Hoekman, Bernard & Martin, Will & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2010. "Conclude Doha: it matters!," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 505-530, July.
    4. Paola Conconi & Giovanni Facchini & Maurizio Zanardi, 2012. "Fast-Track Authority and International Trade Negotiations," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 146-189, August.
    5. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "International Agricultural Trade and Negotiations : Coping with a New Landscape [Commerce et négociations agricoles commerciales: s'ajuster au nouvel environnement]," Working Papers hal-01592099, HAL.
    6. Jeffrey J. Schott & Minsoo Lee & Julia Muir, 2012. "Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations," Working Paper Series WP12-17, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    7. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    8. Conconi, Paola & Perroni, Carlo, 2009. "Do credible domestic institutions promote credible international agreements?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 160-170, September.
    9. Ethan B Kapstein, 2006. "Architects of stability? International cooperation among financial supervisors," BIS Working Papers 199, Bank for International Settlements.
    10. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2010. "Services Trade and Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 642-692, September.
    11. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    12. Kari Irwin Otteburn, 2023. "All in favour? Indian business interests and the India-EU FTA," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 311-329, September.
    13. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    14. Fiorini, Matteo; Lebrand, Mathilde, 2016. "The Political Economy of Services Trade Agreements," Economics Working Papers ECO2016/05, European University Institute.
    15. Marcelo de Paiva Abreu, 2005. "The FTAA and the political economy of protection in Brazil and the US," Textos para discussão 494, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    16. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    17. Heike Schroeder, 2010. "Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 317-332, December.
    18. Koichi Hamada & Asahi Noguchi, 2005. "The Role of Preconceived Ideas in Macroeconomic Policy: Japan's Experiences in the Two Deflationary Periods," Working Papers 908, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    19. Robert M. Stern, 2011. "Trade in Financial Services—Has the IMF been Involved Constructively?," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 5(1), pages 65-92, February.
    20. Schmidt, Susanne K. & Werle, Raymund, 1993. "Technical controversy in international standardization," MPIfG Discussion Paper 93/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Wto; Doha round; Deadlock; Impasse; Two-level games;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F02 - International Economics - - General - - - International Economic Order and Integration
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:9780. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.