IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/adbewp/0021.html

The Doha Agenda and Development: A View from the Uruguay Round

Author

Listed:
  • J. Michael Finger

    (American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research)

Abstract

The Doha Agenda continues the Uruguay Round's expansion of trade negotiations into behind-the-border policies, regulations, and institutions. This distracts attention from the part of the Agenda most directly linked to poverty reduction and economic development: removal of distortions to agricultural trade and of import restrictions on industrial goods—by developing as well as developed countries. Behind-the-border areas are important for development but Uruguay Round experience indicates that trade negotiations provide here a troubled approach to development. On these, development institutions should lead. They are more comfortable with the necessary technicalities of project design and cost-benefit analysis. Development institutions' legalities are country-specific and project-specific, more suited to the one-off problems and trial error rhythm of what is needed than is World Trade Organization's generic approach to legal obligation. If there is momentum behind the development dimensions of the new areas, then the trade dimensions can be managed; but one cannot push the string.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Michael Finger, 2002. "The Doha Agenda and Development: A View from the Uruguay Round," ADB Economics Working Paper Series 21, Asian Development Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:adbewp:0021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.adb.org/publications/doha-agenda-and-development-view-uruguay-round
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:wbk:wbpubs:14050 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Reichman, Jerome H, 1998. "Securing Compliance with the Trips Agreement after US v India," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 585-601, December.
    3. Preeg, Ernest H., 1995. "Traders in a Brave New World," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226679594, December.
    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. J. Mutti & R. Sampson & B. Yeung, 2000. "The effects of the Uruguay round: empirical evidence from U.S. industry," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 59-69, January.
    2. David, Paul A., 2001. "Tragedy of the Public Knowledge 'Commons'? Global Science, Intellectual Property and the Digital Technology Boomerang," Research Memorandum 003, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Edwin L Lai, 2004. "The Economics of Intellectual Property Protection in the Global Economy," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000481, David K. Levine.
    4. Francesca Spigarelli & Hao Way, 2012. "The rising Chinese pharmaceutical industry: local champions vs global players," Working Papers 1206, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    5. Nelson, Douglas R., 2015. "Prospects for Constitutionalization of the WTO," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 135-153, January.
    6. Baldwin, Robert E., 2009. "Trade negotiations within the GATT/WTO framework: A survey of successes and failures," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 515-525, July.
    7. Robert E. Baldwin, 2009. "U.S. Trade Policy Since 1934: An Uneven Path Toward Greater Trade Liberalization," NBER Working Papers 15397, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Marcelo de Paiva Abreu, 1998. "Brazil, the GATT, and the WTO: history and prospects," Textos para discussão 392, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    9. Robert E. Baldwin, 2006. "Failure of the WTO Ministerial Conference at Cancun: Reasons and Remedies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 677-696, June.
    10. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Strategic Trade, Competitive Industries and Agricultural Trade Disputes," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 113-128, July.
    11. Paul A. David, 2000. "The Digital Technology Boomerang: New Intellectual Property Rights Threaten Global "Open Science"," Working Papers 00016, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    12. Finger, J. Michael & Reincke, Ulrich & Castro, Adriana, 1999. "Market access bargaining in the Uruguay Round - Rigid or relaxed reciprocity?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2258, The World Bank.
    13. Don Kenyon & Pierre van der Eng, 2011. "From strangers to partners in the hemisphere: New Prospects in Australia’s Economic Relations with Latin America," CEPR Discussion Papers 650, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    14. Andrew G. Brown & Robert M. Stern, 2009. "Global Market Integration and National Sovereignty," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization And International Trade Policies, chapter 4, pages 77-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Baldwin, Robert E & Magee, Christopher S, 2000. "Is Trade Policy for Sale? Congressional Voting on Recent Trade Bills," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 105(1-2), pages 79-101, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F63 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - Economic Development

    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:ris:adbewp:0021. 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: Orlee Velarde (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eradbph.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.