SiteImage

The Politics of WTO Reform:
Debating EU and US Roles Towards Sustainable Development

 

Occasional Paper - August 2008: Assessing the Development Friendliness of Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in the Economic Partnership Agreements and An Analytical and Comparative Guide to the Dispute Settlement Provisions in the EU's FTAs, Mehmet KARLI.

  

 

Aims and Scope

The challenge of reforming the World Trade Organization (WTO) to reflect an agenda where all countries can live well and within the means of the planet has become one of the most pressing problems within global economic governance. A focus on sustainable development is contained in the original WTO Preamble, yet many analysts have questioned the extent to which this has been a primary objective in the history of the organization. Such concerns have become more pronounced in the context of the Doha Round where negotiation proposals linked to development have often not matched the expectations of many actors. How the Members of the WTO system chart a viable course of reforms post-Doha will be crucial in terms of both normative concerns and livelihood security, for developed and developing countries alike. As principal players within the organization, it is vital to understand how the ideas and actions of the trade superpowers – the EU and the US – shape core norms and policy prescriptions. The EU and the US play different roles in the management of the WTO system, sometimes converging, often diverging. The meaning and practice of reform - considered in its broadest sense - is a very political business and many proposals bear the strong imprint of the EU and the US. The consequences of the actions of the actors can be substantial. Some Members are enabled by certain reforms, but others may be disabled.

This research project represents an agenda to study the politics of WTO reform with a particular focus on the EU and US. Led by the University of Oxford (core institution: European Studies Centre) and the German Marshall Fund of the United States, it brings together scholars and practitioners in an international collaborative project, with a view to become a ‘network of networks’. The initiative aims not to artificially divorce theoretical frameworks from policy options, but rather, to bridge, and understand the relationships between, both bodies of knowledge. In turn, it is expected that the results of such enquiries will have enhanced policy relevance and value in the trade community. The work of the network began with a conceptualisation phase, before organising events that have brought policymakers into engagements with academics on the future of WTO reform. Please return to this webpage for forthcoming updates.

 

Institutional Partners

 

Research Agenda

Based on collaborative discussions, the group has outlined a research agenda that provides a basis for forthcoming outputs. See here for details. The group is pursuing research under different clusters, including:

  • Conceptual debates concerning legitimacy, notions of 'fairness', and ethics While it is clear that the WTO has developed a pattern of attracting a plurality of global critics, understanding the sources, qualities, and strengths of the organisation's legitimacy remains an enduring analytical enquiry. At the same time, closely tied to the struggle over the definition and accumulation of legitimacy are challenges concerning equity and 'fairness' in the trading regime. And when one begins to conduct a more rigorous analysis of the relationship between power and legitimacy in the trading regime, a focus on the underlying political ethics of the order becomes clearer. The work of the group is keen to explore these difficult debates while, at the same time, articulating alternative practical visions of political ethics at the international level. A number of critical questions could be inspired by such investigations including, but not limited to: How can greater tolerance, transparency, and reason be accommodated in the WTO setting? To what extent do these principles in turn serve to enhance WTO legitimacy? How does the promotion of a global political ethics fit with the judicial and political negotiating spheres respectively and through what concrete instruments should it be operationalised?
  • Contested boundaries and issue linkages
    The organisation of issues that are recognised as 'trade-related' is an enduring concern for WTO Members, one which has arguably become more problematic during the Doha Round. The US and the EU work to organise some trade issues into the WTO, and organise other issues out. The boundaries of the WTO's mandate, therefore, are never stable but always a source of debate between different types of actors. How does one assess the 'appropriate' agenda for the institution? How can the WTO link with, or reconcile, relations with other prominent regimes, such as aid, the environment, or investment? In particular, in light of the contested state of discussions in recent years, how can one re-examine the central relationship between trade and development?
  • Re-examining the relationship between multilateralism and preferentialism
    Both the US and the EU have tended to try to export their own policy paradigms to govern the multilateral level. In general terms, this means seeking to mould WTO rules in ways that are compatible with their own internal political economy. Increasingly, however, both powers appear to be torn between contradictory principles, such as non-discrimination and preferential treatment, or bilateralism and multilateralism. How can one understand these practices? Is there a need to minimise the friction between regionalism and non-discriminatory trade relations managed by the WTO? If so, what disciplines or procedures could help clarify WTO provisions on regional trade agreements? A specific focus in this cluster is on the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the EU and African, Caribbean, and Pacific (APC) countries. The following selection of documents provide some critical analysis of the EPAs:

Activities

On June 25, 2008, the European Studies Centre and the German Marshall Fund of the United States will co-host 'An Oxford Brainstorming on the EPAs Debate'. The objective of the event is to bring together a range of stakeholders in an informal setting to discuss the state of the EPAs, both reflecting upon what has happened and how a future path can be mapped. Representatives from ACP countries, the European Commission, the WTO Secretariat, academics and other policy analysts are due to attend. From the Commission, Mr Karl Falkenberg, Deputy Director-General for External Trade has confirmed his attendance.

On October 26, 2007, a successful meeting was held at the European Studies Centre, Oxford, to discuss different themes and topics related to the project. Denis Redonnet, Deputy Head of Cabinet for External Trade at the European Commission, was in attendance. Forthcoming events, as well as subsequent publications, will be posted here.

 

Biographies of Core Research Team

A distinguishing feature of the project is the combined academic and policy expertise of the lead researchers, including a record of prior collaboration. The network is always evolving and is open to new ideas and people. For details on biographies, please see here for details.

 

Contact Details

For all enquiries, including if you wish to subscribe to the mailing list of the network, please contact Matthew Eagleton-Pierce (Research Officer) at matthew.eagleton-pierce_at_sant.ox.ac.uk