IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/lawdev/v2y2009i1n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Countries in the 21st Century WTO: New Contours of India's Global Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Karmakar Suparna

Abstract

As an institution, the WTO (with 153 members) has functioned very differently from the GATT. The old power centers within the multilateral trade regime have been joined by new power centers, especially the emerging economies. Developing and the least-developed members, acting in coalitions, have become more effective players in the Doha Round with significant success in ensuring that WTO agreements are in their favour. However, they have not had similar success in setting the negotiating agendas that meet their expectations and development concerns.This paper examines the changing contours of the engagement of developing countries, with special reference to India, in the 21st century WTO system of trade governance. It argues that emerging developing countries today need to pick up the leadership mantle with determination and play a constructive role in furthering the cause for sustained trade integration. This will be in the larger interest of protecting their international market access as well as much needed domestic reforms. The paper tries to identify the role and responsibilities of emerging powers like India in the steering and governance of the post-Doha WTO.

Suggested Citation

  • Karmakar Suparna, 2009. "Developing Countries in the 21st Century WTO: New Contours of India's Global Engagement," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-27, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:2:y:2009:i:1:n:1
    DOI: 10.2202/1943-3867.1010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1943-3867.1010
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1943-3867.1010?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. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2005. "Three Variations on ‘The Future of the WTO’," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 299-309, June.
    2. Bhagwati Jagdish, 2005. "From Seattle to Hong Kong: Are We Getting Anywhere?," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 5(4), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Ismail Faizel, 2008. "Rediscovering the Role of Developing Countries in GATT before the Doha Round," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 51-73, December.
    4. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521515610 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Faizel Ismail, 2008. "Rediscovering the Role of Developing Countries in GATT before the Doha Round," Trade Working Papers 22101, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    6. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2011. "What Do Trade Negotiators Negotiate About? Empirical Evidence from the World Trade Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1238-1273, June.
    7. Jeffrey J. Schott & Jayashree Watal, 2000. "Decision-Making in the WTO," Policy Briefs PB00-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    8. Amrita Narlikar & Diana Tussie, 2004. "The G20 at the Cancun Ministerial: Developing Countries and Their Evolving Coalitions in the WTO," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 947-966, July.
    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. Joanne Gowa & Raymond Hicks, 2012. "The most-favored nation rule in principle and practice: Discrimination in the GATT," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 247-266, September.
    2. Euan MacMillan, 2009. "Explaining rising regionalism and failing multilateralism: Consensus decision-making and expanding WTO membership," Working Papers 200916, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    3. Lajtos, Ildikó, 2010. "Verhandlungsverhalten und Anspruchsanpassung im internationalen Verhandlungsprozess: Die WTO-Agrarverhandlungen zum Abbau exportwettbewerbsfördernder Maßnahmen," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 55, number 94723.
    4. Euan MacMillan, 2009. "Explaining rising regionalism and failing multilateralism : consensus decision-making and expanding WTO membership," Working Papers 200921, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    5. Bernhard Zangl & Frederick Heußner & Andreas Kruck & Xenia Lanzendörfer, 2016. "Imperfect adaptation: how the WTO and the IMF adjust to shifting power distributions among their members," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 171-196, June.
    6. Giovanni Maggi & Ralph Ossa, 2020. "Are Trade Agreements Good For You?," NBER Working Papers 27252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Chad P. Bown & Patricia Tovar, 2016. "Preferential Liberalization, Antidumping, and Safeguards: Stumbling Block Evidence from MERCOSUR," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 262-294, November.
    8. Chad P. Bown, 2010. "China's WTO Entry: Antidumping, Safeguards, and Dispute Settlement," NBER Chapters, in: China's Growing Role in World Trade, pages 281-337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2014. "Emerging economies, trade policy, and macroeconomic shocks," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 261-273.
    10. Sanjay Srivastava, 2008. "Negotiation Analysis," International Studies, , vol. 45(1), pages 23-43, March.
    11. Javorcik, Beata S. & Narciso, Gaia, 2017. "WTO accession and tariff evasion," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 59-71.
    12. James Lake & Maia Linask, 2016. "Domestic political competition and pro-cyclical import protection," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 564-591, August.
    13. Lake, James & Linask, Maia K., 2016. "Could tariffs be pro-cyclical?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 124-146.
    14. Chen, Bo & Ma, Hong & Xu, Yuan, 2014. "Measuring China’s trade liberalization: A generalized measure of trade restrictiveness index," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 994-1006.
    15. Cristina Veronica Andreescu & Roxana Corina Sfetea, 2013. "EU-US Trade Relationship," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 5(4), pages 62-66, December.
    16. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier D'Haultfœuille, 2020. "Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(9), pages 2964-2996, September.
    17. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2013. "Import protection, business cycles, and exchange rates: Evidence from the Great Recession," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 50-64.
    18. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/f5vtl5h9a73d5ls976m2jb618 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Limão, Nuno & Handley, Kyle, 2013. "Policy Uncertainty, Trade and Welfare: Theory and Evidence for China and the U.S," CEPR Discussion Papers 9615, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Gabriel Ondetti & Sybil Rhodes, 2010. "Courting the South: Lula’s trade diplomacy," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 430, Universidad del CEMA.
    21. Fujiwara, Kenji, 2014. "Pareto-improving tariff-tax reforms under imperfect competition," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 12-20.

    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:lawdev:v:2:y:2009:i:1:n:1. 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.degruyterbrill.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.