IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ekd/003306/330600088.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

National Interests, Coalitions and Rules of Decision in Multilateral Trade Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • David LABORDE
  • Antoine BOUËT

Abstract

The Uruguay Round has often been described as an opposition between USA and European Union (EU) about agriculture. In contrast, the Cancun summit, of which the objective was to launch the Doha Development Round (DDR) highlighted numerous conflicts of interest between various countries or coalitions of WTO (World Trade Organization) members. In WTO rules, it is stipulated that any international agreement on a global package has to be adopted unanimously. As a matter of fact, controversial issues are various : degree of liberalization in agricultural sector, progressive or linear formulae, cancellation of export subsidies, decoupling of domestic support, liberalization in non agricultural sectors, special and differential treatment to be reserved to developing countries or to least developed ones, Singapore issues about trade facilitation, investment policy… On the other side , trade negotiations are affected by the emergence of new coalitions: G10, G22, G90, Like -Minded Group, SVE (Small and Vulnerable Economies), Cairns group… About many issues, it is difficult for coalitions to avoid controversy. Of course, negotiating actors could have adopted strategies: standing on maximalist positions in order to obtain greater benefits. But convergence is slow such that pundits are rather pessimistic. One can change rules of negotiation ; for this purpose Sally (2004) suggested that least developed countries could be excluded from negotiating: ‘Stated baldly : only a minority of the WTO members have the bargaining power and capacity to advance negotiations. These are the OECD countries and about a score or so of advanced developing countries (most of them in the G20). Hence the key liberalising and rule-making deals in the WTO must be done by the 30-plus countries (counting the EU as one) that accounts for over 80% of international trade and an even bigger share of foreign direct investment.’ (Sally, 2004, p. 11). On one side this proposal is not democratic and could give ri
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • David LABORDE & Antoine BOUËT, 2010. "National Interests, Coalitions and Rules of Decision in Multilateral Trade Negotiations," EcoMod2004 330600088, EcoMod.
  • Handle: RePEc:ekd:003306:330600088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ecomod.net/sites/default/files/document-conference/ecomod2004/812.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antoine Bouet & Lionel Fontagne & Mondher Mimouni & Xavier Pichet, 2002. "MAcMaps : une mesure bilaterale et desagregee de l'acces au marche," Economie Internationale, CEPII research center, issue 89-90, pages 39-64.
    2. Sergio J. Rey, 2000. "articles: Integrated regional econometric+input-output modeling: Issues and opportunities," Papers in Regional Science, Springer;Regional Science Association International, vol. 79(3), pages 271-292.
    3. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Lafourcade, Miren & Mayer, Thierry, 2003. "Can Business and Social Networks Explain the Border Effect Puzzle?," CEPR Discussion Papers 3750, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Mark D. Partridge & Dan S. Rickman, 1998. "Regional Computable General Equilibrium Modeling: A Survey and Critical Appraisal," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 21(3), pages 205-248, December.
    5. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    6. Eduardo Amaral Haddad & Edson Paulo Domingues, 2003. "Interstate Trade and Regional Development: an (Integrated) Interregional CGE Approach," Anais do XXXI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 31st Brazilian Economics Meeting] e32, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    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. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2004. "The Impact of Multilateral Liberalisation on European Regions: a CGE Assessment," Working Papers 2004-20, CEPII research center.
    2. Witzke, Peter & Britz, Wolfgang, 2005. "Consolidating trade flows and market balances globally using a Highest Posteriori Density estimator," Conference papers 331353, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Haitao Yu, 2018. "A review of input–output models on multisectoral modelling of transportation–economic linkages," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 654-677, September.
    4. Eromenko, Igor, 2010. "Accession to the WTO. Computable General Equilibrium Analysis: the Case of Ukraine. Part II," MPRA Paper 67452, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Yoshio Kajitani & Hirokazu Tatano, 2018. "Applicability of a spatial computable general equilibrium model to assess the short-term economic impact of natural disasters," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 289-312, July.
    6. Glyn Wittwer & Mark Horridge, 2010. "Bringing Regional Detail to a CGE Model using Census Data," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 229-255.
    7. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang, 2017. "Climate change and agriculture under CO2 fertilization effects and farm level adaptation: Where do the models meet?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 556-571.
    8. Eromenko, Igor, 2011. "Accession to the WTO. Computable General Equilibrium Analysis: the Case of Ukraine," MPRA Paper 67535, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Della Lucia, Maria, 2013. "Economic performance measurement systems for event planning and investment decision making," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 91-100.
    10. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang & Atsagli, Philip, 2016. "Environmental and welfare assessment of fossil-fuels subsidies removal: A computable general equilibrium analysis for Ghana," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 1172-1179.
    11. Simon J.Evenett & Mia Mikic & Ravi Ratnayake (ed.), 2011. "Trade-led growth: A sound strategy for Asia," ARTNeT Books and Research Reports, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), number brr10.
    12. Ashkan Masouman & Charles Harvie, 2017. "Measuring Economic Change in the Illawarra, New South Wales: An Integrated Framework," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 50(3), pages 294-308, July.
    13. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Trade policy analysis in the presence of duty drawbacks," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-371, April.
    14. Pierre Boulanger & Hasan Dudu & Emanuele Ferrari & George Philippidis, 2016. "Russian Roulette at the Trade Table: A Specific Factors CGE Analysis of an Agri-food Import Ban," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 272-291, June.
    15. Jiang, Tingsong, 2003. "The Impact of China's WTO Accession on its Regional Economies," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 11.
    16. Henseler, Martin & Piot-Lepetit, Isabelle & Ferrari, Emanuele & Mellado, Aida Gonzalez & Banse, Martin & Grethe, Harald & Parisi, Claudia & Hélaine, Sophie, 2013. "On the asynchronous approvals of GM crops: Potential market impacts of a trade disruption of EU soy imports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 166-176.
    17. Adams, Philip D., 2008. "Insurance against Catastrophic Climate Change: How Much Will an Emissions Trading Scheme Cost Australia?," Conference papers 331770, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    18. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    19. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jan Pokrivcak, 2008. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content of Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_03, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    20. Kym Anderson & Anna Strutt, 2012. "Agriculture and Food Security in Asia by 2030," Macroeconomics Working Papers 23309, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.

    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:ekd:003306:330600088. 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: Theresa Leary (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecomoea.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.