IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v8y2005i1p51-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-Making in the World Trade Organization

Author

Listed:
  • Claus-Dieter Ehlermann
  • Lothar Ehring

Abstract

Globalization creates a demand for international rule-making, and the WTO remains the forum for creating binding and enforceable international trade rules. The WTO therefore needs an effective decision-making system capable of resolving diverging interests. Although the WTO Agreement foresees votes where consensus cannot be reached, the practice of consensus dominates the process of decision-making. The GATT 1947 only spoke of voting and did not mention the word 'consensus'. The WTO Agreement reflects the evolution from votes to consensus in the GATT 1947. Nevertheless, voting was not abandoned in the WTO Agreement. Although the consensus practice generally works well, it nevertheless implies the risk of deadlock and in particular the Membership's inability to respond legislatively where it disagrees with a panel's or the Appellate Body's legal interpretation. Consensus also inherently favours the status quo and can make it extremely difficult to achieve change. Consensus does not provide for equality (in terms of decision and influence) because not every Member has the same ability to maintain vetoes. Consensus of course has many advantages, but it is questionable whether it is also more democratic than the majority rule. Copyright 2005, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Claus-Dieter Ehlermann & Lothar Ehring, 2005. "Decision-Making in the World Trade Organization," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 51-75, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:8:y:2005:i:1:p:51-75
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito & Jonas Tallberg & Magnus Lundgren, 2022. "Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 815-845, October.
    2. Wilfredo Robayo Galvis, 2018. "La defensa internacional de los intereses del estado en América Latina. Temas de derecho internacional público n.° 1," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1076, October.
    3. Bowen, T. Renee & Broz, James, 2020. "Designing an International Economic Order: A Research Agenda," CEPR Discussion Papers 15407, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Josep M. Colomer, 2016. "Is democracy compatible with global institutions?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 260-272, September.
    5. Miettinen, Topi & Vanberg, Christoph, 2020. "Commitment and Conflict in Multilateral Bargaining," Working Papers 0679, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    6. Michael Reiterer, 2009. "The Doha development agenda of the WTO," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 9(4), pages 359-375, October.
    7. Sommerer, Thomas & Squatrito, Theresa & Tallberg, Jonas & Lundgren, Magnus, 2021. "Decision-making in international organizations: institutional design and performance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111834, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:oup:jieclw:v:8:y:2005:i:1:p:51-75. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.