IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/hal-01299828.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What next for the DDA? Quantifying the role of negotiation modalities

Author

Listed:
  • Yvan Decreux

    (ITC (UNCTAD-WTO) - International Trade Center - WTO - UNCTAD)

  • Lionel Fontagné

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement, CEPII - Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales - Centre d'analyse stratégique)

Abstract

Negotiators have reached a deal on a limited series of issues WTO Ministerial Conference in Bali (3–6 December 2013), one of these being trade facilitation. Based on a quantitative assessment taking into account the detail of the last proposals circulated, we argue however that due to the design of the negotiation, achievements of the DDA will eventually be limited. This is due to a lack of ambition making it difficult for negotiat ors to compensate their own concessions. Such feebleness is induced by the way negotiations were organized – in separate groups, without much consideration for, or understanding of, how the different elements added up to more than the sum of the parts. Our quantification of these issues is performed with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model of the world economy, while liberalisation of tariffs is taken into account at the product level in order to address exceptions, flexibilities as well as the non-linear design of the formulas. A reduction in domestic support and the phasing out of export subsidies in agriculture are taken into account, as well as trade facilitation. Our conclusion is that negotiators will have to re-bundle the bits of the negotiation and shift efforts towards the neglected issue of services to make progress towards the objectives agreed on in Bali.

Suggested Citation

  • Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné, 2014. "What next for the DDA? Quantifying the role of negotiation modalities," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01299828, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:hal-01299828
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01299828
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01299828/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoekman, Bernard & Martin, Will & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2010. "Conclude Doha: it matters!," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 505-530, July.
    2. Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David, 2017. "Assessing the potential cost of a failed Doha Round:," IFPRI book chapters, in: Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David (ed.), Agriculture, development, and the global trading system: 2000– 2015, chapter 6, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Simon Evenett, 2014. "The Doha Round impasse: A graphical account," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 143-162, June.
    4. Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David, 2017. "Why is the Doha Development agenda failing? And what can be done? A computable general equilibrium-game theoretical approach :," IFPRI book chapters, in: Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David (ed.), Agriculture, development, and the global trading system: 2000– 2015, chapter 3, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Bouet, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David, 2010. "Eight years of Doha trade talks," IFPRI discussion papers 997, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "Trade liberalization in the bio-economy: coping with a new landscape," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 173-182, November.
    7. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2013. "Can the Doha Round Be a Development Round? Setting a Place at the Table," NBER Chapters, in: Globalization in an Age of Crisis: Multilateral Economic Cooperation in the Twenty-First Century, pages 91-124, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Decreux, Yvan & Ramos, Maria Priscila, 2007. "How does Tariff-rate quota modelling affect CGE results?: an application for MIRAGE," Conference papers 331613, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Gouel, Christophe & Mitaritonna, Cristina & Ramos, Maria Priscila, 2011. "Sensitive products in the Doha negotiations: The case of European and Japanese market access," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2395-2403.
    10. Joseph Francois & Hans Van Meijl & Frank Van Tongeren, 2005. "Trade liberalization in the Doha Development Round [Trade in Manufactures, the Outcome of the Uruguay Round and Developing Country Interests]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 20(42), pages 350-391.
    11. Gootiiz, Batshur & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2009. "Services in Doha : what's on the table ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4903, The World Bank.
    12. Antoine Bouët & Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2008. "Assessing Applied Protection across the World," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 850-863, November.
    13. Suparna Karmakar, 2013. "Life after Bali- renewing the world trade negotiating agenda," Policy Contributions 804, Bruegel.
    14. Antoine Bouet & David Laborde, 2010. "Eight Years of Doha Trade Talks: Where Do We Stand?," Larefi Working Papers 201003, Larefi, Université Bordeaux 4.
    15. Yvan Decreux & Hugo Valin, 2007. "MIRAGE, Updated Version of the Model for Trade Policy Analysis: Focus on Agriculture and Dynamics," Working Papers 2007-15, CEPII research center.
    16. Bernard Hoekman & Alessandro Nicita, 2010. "Assessing the Doha Round: Market access, transactions costs and aid for trade facilitation," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 65-79.
    17. Bouet, Antoine & Laborde, David, 2010. "Eight Years of Doha Trade Talks: Where Do We Stand?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 11(2), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott, 2012. "Will the World Trade Organization Enjoy a Bright Future?," Policy Briefs PB12-11, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    19. Antoine Bouët & David Laborde, 2010. "Assessing the Potential Cost of a Failed Doha," Post-Print hal-01881925, HAL.
    20. Fontagné, Lionel & Guillin, Amélie & Mitaritonna, Cristina, 2010. "Estimations of Tariff Equivalents for the Services Sectors," Conference papers 331941, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    21. Aggarwal, Vinod K & Evenett, Simon, 2013. "A Fragmenting Global Economy: A Weakened WTO, Mega FTAs, and Murky Protectionism," CEPR Discussion Papers 9781, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    22. Simon Lacey, . "Life After Doha: Reflections in the run up to MC9," Chapters, in: Yoshifumi Fukunaga & John Riady, Pierre Sauve (ed.), The Road To Bali: ERIA Perspectives on the WTO Ministerial and Asian Integration, chapter 16, pages 195-219, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    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. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné, 2013. "What Did Happen in the DDA? Quantifying the Role of Negotiation Modalities," Working Papers 2013-38, CEPII research center.
    3. Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné, 2011. "Economic Impact of Potential Outcome of the DDA," Working Papers 2011-23, CEPII research center.
    4. Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David, 2017. "Why is the Doha Development agenda failing? And what can be done? A computable general equilibrium-game theoretical approach :," IFPRI book chapters, in: Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David (ed.), Agriculture, development, and the global trading system: 2000– 2015, chapter 3, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Mathilde Douillet, 2011. "What are the agricultural exports growth perspectives offered to sub-Saharan countries by current trade negotiations?," EcoMod2011 3116, EcoMod.
    6. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "Trade liberalization in the bio-economy: coping with a new landscape," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 173-182, November.
    7. Jean‐Christophe Bureau & Houssein Guimbard & Sébastien Jean, 2019. "Agricultural Trade Liberalisation in the 21st Century: Has It Done the Business?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 3-25, February.
    8. Mathilde Douillet, 2012. "Trade policies and agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa Comparative analysis in a Computable General Equilibrium framework [Politiques commerciales et agriculture en Afrique Sub-Saharienne : analyse c," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03676037, HAL.
    9. Douillet, Mathilde, 2012. "Trade policy reforms in the new agricultural context: Is regional integration a priority for Sub-Saharan African countries agricultural-led industrialization? Insights from a global computable general," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126546, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Bouet, Antoine & Laborde, David, 2010. "Eight Years of Doha Trade Talks: Where Do We Stand?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 11(2), pages 1-22, August.
    11. Popa, Diana, 2011. "Runda Doha: început fără sfârşit [Doha Round: the endless beginning]," MPRA Paper 28764, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 09 Feb 2011.
    12. Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David, 2017. "Assessing the potential cost of a failed Doha Round:," IFPRI book chapters, in: Bouët, Antoine & Laborde Debucquet, David (ed.), Agriculture, development, and the global trading system: 2000– 2015, chapter 6, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2013. "Estimating Effects of Price-Distorting Policies Using Alternative Distortions Databases," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 877-931, Elsevier.
    14. Houssein Guimbard & Maëlan Le Goff, 2014. "Mega-deals: What Consequences for sub-Saharan Africa?," Working Papers 2014-28, CEPII research center.
    15. Gouel, Christophe & Mitaritonna, Cristina & Ramos, Maria Priscila, 2011. "Sensitive products in the Doha negotiations: The case of European and Japanese market access," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2395-2403.
    16. Douillet, Mathilde, 2012. "Trade and agricultural policies in Malawi: Not all policy reform is equally good for the poor," Conference papers 332277, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. Himics, Mihaly & Listorti, Giulia & Tonini, Axel, 2020. "Simulated economic impacts in applied trade modelling: A comparison of tariff aggregation approaches," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 344-357.
    18. Hilel Hamadache & Sophie S. Drogue, 2014. "Staple food market regulation in Algeria, what is the alternative policy? A CGE analysis for wheat," Post-Print hal-02795719, HAL.
    19. Hoekman, Bernard & Martin, Will & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2010. "Conclude Doha: it matters!," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 505-530, July.
    20. Jean Chateau & Lionel Fontagné & Jean Fouré & Åsa Johansson & Eduardo Olaberría, 2015. "Trade patterns in the 2060 world economy," OECD Journal: Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2015(1), pages 67-100.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Doha Development Round; Computable General Equilibrium Models; Trade facilitation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation

    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:hal:cesptp:hal-01299828. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.