IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

China and the G-21: A New North-South Divide in the WTO After Cancún?

  • Rolf J. Langhammer

The paper analyses the interests of China as a member of the G-21, which contributed to the failure of the WTO Ministerial Conference in Cancún/Mexico in September 2003. It concludes that the median member of G-21 is more inward-looking and less reform-minded than China. A failure of the Doha Round due to a North-South divide between the US/EU on the one hand and the G-21 on the other hand would cause more harm to the latter than to the former group and would also impact negatively upon China, which has fewer alternatives to a multilateral round than both most of the other G-21 members and the two big players. Thus, China would be well-advised to remain unconstrained in its trade policies and does not become member of any group.

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

Paper provided by Kiel Institute for the World Economy in its series Kiel Working Papers with number 1194.

in new window

Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:kie:kieliw:1194
Contact details of provider: Postal: Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 85853
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Sébastien Dessus & Kiichiro Fukasaku & Raed Safadi, 2001. "Multilateral Tariff Liberalisation and the Developing Countries," OECD Development Centre Policy Briefs 18, OECD Publishing.
  2. Wang, Zhi, 2003. "The impact of China's WTO accession on patterns of world trade," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-41, January.
  3. Andrew K. Rose, 2004. "Do We Really Know That the WTO Increases Trade?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 98-114, March.
  4. Anderson, Kym & Yao, Shunli, 2003. "How Can South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa Gain From the Next WTO Round?," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 18, pages 466-481.
  5. Elena Ianchovichina & Terrie Walmsley, 2005. "Impact of China's WTO Accession on East Asia," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 261-277, 04.
  6. Joseph Francois & Hans van Meijl, 2003. "Economic Implications of Trade Liberalization Under the Doha Round," Working Papers 2003-20, CEPII research center.
  7. Venables, Anthony J, 2000. "Winners and Losers from Regional Integration Agreements," CEPR Discussion Papers 2528, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  8. Dutta, M., 2003. "China's economic presence: Asian economic community," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 581-592, August.
  9. Ethier, Wilfred J, 1998. "The New Regionalism," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(449), pages 1149-61, July.
  10. Langhammer, Rolf J. & Piazolo, Daniel & Siebert, Horst, 2002. "Assessing proposals for a transatlantic free trade area," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 2769, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:kie:kieliw:1194. 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: (Dieter Stribny)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Dieter Stribny to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.