IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/pbrief/pb06-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can Doha Still Deliver on the Development Agenda?

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly Ann Elliott

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

Developing countries, especially the poorest, have the most at risk if the Doha Round is not wrapped up this year. If the multilateral negotiations languish, the recent trend toward bilateral and regional trade agreements will accelerate. These arrangements hurt the smallest and poorest countries the most, since they are often excluded. Developing countries would also lose the leverage they gain from negotiating as a group in the multilateral context. Proposals of particular interest to developing countries, including aid for trade and duty- and quota-free treatment for least-developed countries, might also be pulled off the table. Given their experience with the Uruguay Round, it is not surprising that developing countries are waiting for developed countries to offer serious reductions in agricultural protection before making serious offers on nonagricultural market access and services. But developing countries must move, and they must move now.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2006. "Can Doha Still Deliver on the Development Agenda?," Policy Briefs PB06-5, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb06-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/can-doha-still-deliver-development-agenda
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:iie:pbrief:pb06-5. 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: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.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.