Developing Countries After the Uruguay Round
The Uruguay Round marks an important turning point for the developing countries. The three core agreements on which the new World Trade Organization (WTO) is based present a remarkable range of obligations and responsibilities for a set of countries that were effectively outside any multilateral discipline on trade matters. Meanwhile, the few concrete gains that accrue to developing countries, such as the phasing out of the MFA, are suspiciously back-loaded. This is the wrong way to read the significance of the Uruguay Round for them, however. First of all, there are a number of important ways in which the Uruguay Round agreements promise to strengthen multilateral discipline in world trade. This is especially true in the area of dispute settlement. Second, since taking advantage of international trade is part and parcel of good development strategy, most of the developing country `concessions' need to be entered on the positive side of the balance sheet, and not viewed as a liability. Finally, there may be some subtle ways in which the Uruguay Round agreements can help developing country governments build better structures of governance at home to enhance the performance of their economies in areas that go beyond trade. The real threats to developing countries lie in the post-Uruguay agenda, in the demands for upward harmonization in the areas of labour and environment. A well-designed social safeguards clause will not necessarily be inimical to the interests of developing countries, and may forestall the emergence of a new set of `grey area' measures outside of the WTO.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
|Date of creation:||Dec 1994|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.|
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
|Order Information:|| Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:1084. 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: ()The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct email address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.