IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Things Fall Apart: Doha and the End of the Post-War Trade Consensus

  • Kent Jones
Registered author(s):

    This paper focuses on the failure of the Doha Round, representing the end of the post-war multilateral consensus on comprehensive trade liberalisation established in the GATT. The need to achieve consensus, combined with the requirement of a single undertaking, created an enormous burden on the WTO’s negotiating structure. The traditional informal methods of committee chair-led consensus building and intervention by the Director-General (D-G) in smallgroup ‘green room’ meetings, inherited from the GATT, could not achieve a final agreement in the Doha Round. The changing balance of bargaining power, the large and diverse membership, and a complicated negotiating agenda appear to have reduced the ‘zone of agreement’ within which WTO members could negotiate. In addition, the disappointments among many developing countries with the Uruguay Round, combined with the concerns of all members regarding the legalisation of trade commitments through dispute settlement, have eroded trust in the informal processes and the effectiveness of the D-G. New negotiating structures are needed in order to make broad-based multilateral trade liberalisation possible.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by World Economics, Economic & Financial Publishing, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE in its journal World Economics Journal.

    Volume (Year): 13 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 4 (October)
    Pages: 125-152

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:wej:wldecn:541
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wej:wldecn:541. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ed Jones)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.