IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/55900.html

Special and Differential Treatment in the GATT: A Pyrrhic Victory for Developing Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Christie, Andrew

Abstract

Preferential measures for developing countries implemented within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade failed to achieve their purported goal of facilitating economic development; this failure was due to their weak theoretical underpinnings and poor policy design. Not only were the demands developing countries made for discriminatory preferences largely ineffectual, their demands for preferential treatment, together with their forgoing full participation in the multilateral trading system, fundamentally reduced the obligation of developed countries to consider the interests of developing countries in future negotiation rounds. Thus the winning of preferences was rendered a pyrrhic victory for developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Christie, Andrew, 2009. "Special and Differential Treatment in the GATT: A Pyrrhic Victory for Developing Countries," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:55900
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.55900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/55900/files/christie10-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.55900?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wilkinson, Rorden & Scott, James, 2008. "Developing country participation in the GATT: a reassessment," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 473-510, July.
    2. Srinivasan, T. N., 2005. "Nondiscrimination in GATT/WTO: was there anything to begin with and is there anything left?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 69-95, March.
    3. Prebisch, Raúl, 1950. "The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 29973, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Baldwin, R E & Murray, Tracy, 1977. "MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits under the GSP," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(345), pages 30-46, March.
    5. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    6. repec:wbk:wbpubs:5970 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Anne O. Krueger, 1996. "The Political Economy of Trade Protection," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number krue96-2, December.
    8. Ahmad, Jaleel, 1985. "Prospects of trade liberalization between the developed and the developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 1077-1086, September.
    9. Ozden, Caglar & Reinhardt, Eric, 2005. "The perversity of preferences: GSP and developing country trade policies, 1976-2000," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 1-21, October.
    10. Kimberly Ann Elliott, 1997. "Corruption and the Global Economy," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 12, October.
    11. E. Paul Durrenberger, 2005. "Labour," Chapters, in: James G. Carrier (ed.), A Handbook of Economic Anthropology, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. André Sapir, 1981. "Trade benefits under the EEC generalized system of preferences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8290, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    13. Wolf, Martin, 1987. "Differential and More Favorable Treatment of Developing Countries and the International Trading System," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 1(4), pages 647-668, September.
    14. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2006. "Enlarging the Vision for Trade Policy Space: Special and Differentiated Treatment and Infant Industry Issues," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1395-1407, October.
    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. Ana Luiza Cortez & Mehmet Arda, 2014. "Global trade rules for supporting development in the post-2015 era," CDP Background Papers 019, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    2. Omphemetse S. Sibanda Sr., 2015. "Towards a Revised GATT/WTO Special and Differential Treatment Regime for Least Developed and Developing Countries," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 50(1), pages 31-40, 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. Persson, Maria, 2012. "From trade preferences to trade facilitation: Taking stock of the issues," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 6, pages 1-33.
    2. Ingo Borchert, 2009. "Trade diversion under selective preferential market access," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1390-1410, November.
    3. Maria Cipollina & David Laborde Debucquet & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "The tide that does not raise all boats: an assessment of EU preferential trade policies," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 199-231, February.
    4. Sharma, Anupa & Grant, Jason & Boys, Kathryn, 2015. "Truly Preferential Treatment? Reconsidering the Generalized System of (Trade) Preferences," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205890, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Moeller, Thordis & Grethe, Harald, 2010. "Climate Change and European Agriculture in 2050: Outlook for Cereal and Oilseed Markets," Conference papers 331938, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. McCalla, Alex F., 1992. "GATT, Preferential/Regional Trading Blocks and Agricultural Trade," 1992 Conference (36th), February 10-13, 1992, Canberra, Australia 146544, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Mary Amiti & John Romalis, 2007. "Will the Doha Round Lead to Preference Erosion?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 54(2), pages 338-384, June.
    8. Соколовская Е.В., 2016. "Unilateral tariff cuts: a theory," Экономический вестник университета. Сборник научных трудов ученых и аспирантов, CyberLeninka;Государственное высшее учебное заведение «Переяслав-Хмельницкий государственный педагогический университет имени Григория Сковороды», issue 29-1, pages 268-274.
    9. Fontagné, Lionel & Limardi, Michela, 2024. "The Generalized System of Preferences and NGO activism," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    10. Dale Truett & Lila Truett, 1993. "Trade preferences and exports of manufactures: A case study of Bolivia and Brazil," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 129(3), pages 573-590, September.
    11. Persson, Maria, 2013. "Trade Preferences from a Policy Perspective," Working Papers 2013:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    12. Krishna, Kala & Salamanca, Carlos & Suzuki, Yuta & Volpe Martincus, Christian, 2025. "Learning to use trade agreements," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    13. Lyu, Jianxing & Prehn, Soren & Zhang, Yanjie & Glauben, Thomas & Zeng, Yinchu, 2021. "Trade creation, political sensitivity and product exclusions: the political economy of agriculture protection in China’s FTAs," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(03), January.
    14. Langhammer, Rolf J., 1983. "Die allgemeinen Zollpräferenzen der Europäischen Gemeinschaft für Entwicklungsländer: Fehlschlag oder Erfolg? Eine kritische Bewertung der ersten Dekade," Kiel Discussion Papers 95, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    15. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank.
    16. Persson, Maria & Wilhelmsson, Fredrik, 2006. "Assessing the Effects of EU Trade Preferences for Developing Countries," Working Papers 2006:4, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 26 Jun 2006.
    17. Agostino, Maria Rosaria & Aiello, Francesco & Cardamone, Paola, 2007. "Analyzing the Impact of Trade Preferences in Gravity Models. Does Aggregation Matter?," Working Papers 7294, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    18. Keck, Alexander & Lendle, Andreas, 2012. "New evidence on preference utilization," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2012-12, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    19. Jeffrey G. Williamson & Luis Bertola, 2003. "Globalization in Latin America Before 1940," NBER Working Papers 9687, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Waterbury, John, 1999. "The Long Gestation and Brief Triumph of Import-Substituting Industrialization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 323-341, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ags:ecjilt:55900. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.html .

    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.