O Sistema De Comércio Multilateral Evoluiu Como Resultado De

ORGANIZAÇÃO DO COMÉRCIO MUNDIAL NOTÍCIAS DA OMC: COMUNICADO DE IMPRENSA DE 1995 PRESS25 16 de outubro de 1995 A crescente complexidade nas Relações Econômicas Internacionais exige ampliar e aprofundar o sistema comercial multilateral - Diretor Geral da OMC 147 Os pressupostos políticos de longa data da Guerra Fria tornaram-se irrelevantes e as relações Norte-Sul , Dominado tantas vezes no passado por uma polarização desnecessária e um diálogo de surdos, mudou irrevogavelmente, 148 disse o Sr. Renato Ruggiero, Diretor Geral da OMC, hoje (16 de outubro) na conferência Paul-Henri Spaak na Harvard University, Boston, EUA. Do ponto de vista do sistema comercial multilateral, agora enfrentamos uma dupla tarefa de ampliar o alcance do sistema geograficamente para torná-lo verdadeiramente global e de garantir que ele continue efetivo diante de uma crescente complexidade nas relações econômicas internacionais. Ruggiero esboçou os aspectos mais urgentes da agenda atual e previsível que enfrenta o sistema comercial multilateral, enfatizando que a OMC deve acomodar uma gama mais ampla de interesses à medida que se torna uma instituição mais inclusiva e abrangente. Um dos principais objetivos era levar a China, a Rússia e outras economias em transição para o sistema comercial multilateral em termos que contribuam para o seu próprio processo de reforma, mas que apoiam plenamente a integridade do sistema. Muitos países em desenvolvimento haviam abandonado a antiga divisão Norte-Sul e acreditavam no sistema comercial da OMC para a continuidade, a estabilidade e a promessa das oportunidades comerciais, movendo-se para as políticas comerciais liberais e uma maior dependência da concorrência internacional para gerar renda e crescimento. Mas, para os países em desenvolvimento de baixa renda que claramente não compartilhavam o aumento da prosperidade global, a OMC assumia uma responsabilidade compartilhada. Por sua vez, a OMC deve assegurar que esses países tenham podido diversificar sua produção de exportação e expandir seus mercados de exportação numa base competitiva. Ruggiero sublinhou que a criação histórica da OMC precisava nutrir-se de um sistema robusto, continuamente em evolução, assim como a economia mundial que sustenta. A sua credibilidade baseou-se nos governos membros em pleno cumprimento das regras, disciplinas e compromissos de abertura de mercado resultantes da Rodada Uruguai e da execução bem sucedida do mandato interno para conduzir novas negociações, particularmente na área de comércio de serviços. O Sr. Ruggiero foi mais adiante, descrevendo a possível nova agenda de questões levantadas pelo processo geopolítico mais amplo de integração econômica global - questões como o comércio e o meio ambiente, o comércio e as normas sociais, a reciprocidade e o princípio NMF, o crescimento do regionalismo e o sistema multilateral de comércio E política de investimento e concorrência. Os desafios enfrentados pelo sistema multilateral de comércio, segundo Ruggiero, são muito mais do que questões comerciais, como costumavam ser definidos. A confluência dos acontecimentos políticos e econômicos dos últimos anos coloca-nos no limiar de uma oportunidade histórica de estabelecer um sistema verdadeiramente global para a condução efetiva das relações econômicas internacionais. O texto completo do discurso de Ruggieros está em anexo. Nota aos editores: Paul-Henri Spaak (1899-1972) foi o principal estadista da Bélgica nas décadas que se seguiram à Segunda Guerra Mundial e um dos principais defensores da cooperação europeia. Ele desempenhou um importante papel na formação da Comunidade Económica Europeia e da Organização do Tratado do Atlântico Norte. O DESAFIO GLOBAL: OPORTUNIDADES E ESCOLHAS NO SISTEMA DE NEGOCIAÇÃO MULTILATERAL O 14º Paul-Henri Spaak Conferência Director-Geral, Organização Mundial do Comércio Universidade de Harvard, 16 de outubro de 1995 Estou feliz por estar aqui hoje para entregar a 14ª aula Paul-Henri Spaak e Para homenagear a memória de um grande visionário e estadista europeu. Spaak dedicou sua vida à causa da cooperação internacional, fazendo sua maior contribuição em um momento em que os líderes do mundo procuraram redefinir a ordem global, seguindo o conflito armado mais generalizado na história humana. É inteiramente consistente que Paul-Henri Spaak era um comiscado pan-europeu e um atlantista - estes eram peças interligadas da mesma quebra-cabeças. Da mesma forma que hoje, em nosso mundo extraordinariamente interdependente, não penso que possamos falar de cooperação internacional sem ter uma visão global. É por esta razão que eu gostaria de me concentrar na cooperação internacional no sentido mais amplo e estou certo de que não se surpreenderá com o fato de a minha ênfase estar na importância fundamental do sistema comercial multilateral para o crescimento e a estabilidade internacionais. Quero dar-lhe a sensação de um sistema que está continuamente em evolução, assim como a economia mundial que sustenta. Deixe-me começar onde o Spaak começou, na luta para reconstruir um mundo melhor depois de 1945. Espero mostrar-lhe que avançamos, que os desafios e as oportunidades que enfrentamos hoje são algo comparáveis ​​aos que enfrentaram os pais fundadores do nosso sistema . Sua visão é algo que precisamos urgentemente para recuperar. Com as lições do nacionalismo destrutivo e a política econômica interior voltada à mente, os acordos de comércio internacional pós-guerra foram projetados para atrair todas as nações para uma interdependência econômica mútua que ajudaria a salvaguardar a paz e a segurança. O comércio deveria desempenhar um papel central na consolidação das relações entre as nações, na subscrição da harmonia internacional. A partir de princípios de inspiração americana e de orientação transatlântica, o sistema de comércio do GATT contribuiu de forma vital para a paz e a prosperidade ao longo do último meio século, em um estágio mundial cada vez maior. Os fundamentos do sistema foram enraizados fortemente no princípio da não discriminação e enfatizaram uma sólida relação contratual baseada em regras entre os membros. Esses dois elementos foram a fonte do sucesso do GATTs. É um sucesso que se reflete em um aumento de 13 vezes no comércio internacional desde 1950. Cada vez mais, as oportunidades econômicas dependem do intercâmbio internacional. Nos Estados Unidos, por exemplo, as exportações totalizaram apenas cinco por cento da renda nacional em 1960 pelo início da década de 1990, a participação das exportações no PIB mais do que duplicou. Infelizmente, faltamos boas estatísticas sobre o comércio de serviços internacionais, mas sabemos que o comércio de serviços está se expandindo ainda mais rápido do que o comércio de bens e agora representa cerca de 20% dos fluxos de comércio internacional. À medida que o comércio cresce em importância, o mesmo contribui para a criação e manutenção de empregos. Somente nos Estados Unidos, mais de 7 milhões de postos de trabalho são suportados pelas exportações de mercadorias. Cerca de um terço de todos os empregos criados nos Estados Unidos ao longo dos últimos 10 anos são devido ao aumento das exportações de mercadorias, e praticamente todos os novos empregos de manufatura emanam da atividade de exportação. Se tivéssemos números de serviços, esses números seriam ainda mais impressionantes. Além disso, os fluxos de investimentos internacionais também cresceram dramaticamente nos últimos anos. Os influxos de investimento direto estrangeiro para todos os países atingiram US $ 50 bilhões por ano durante a primeira metade da década de 1980 e subiram para US $ 194 bilhões em 1993. Houve um tempo em que os negócios internacionais tendiam a ver o comércio eo investimento como meios alternativos para garantir o acesso a estrangeiros Mercados. Hoje, as empresas precisam ser capazes de investir e negociar em escala global - e, para isso, dependem de regimes comerciais e de investimento abertos e previsíveis. O GATT presidiu oito rodadas de negociações comerciais multilaterais. Ao fazê-lo, reduziu gradualmente as tarifas, reduzindo-as a uma média de menos de 4% hoje, um décimo do que estavam no período imediato da pós-guerra. À medida que as tarifas foram reduzidas, outras medidas de restrição comercial tornaram-se mais óbvias. Nas últimas rodadas das negociações do GATT, a ênfase mudou para as barreiras comerciais não-tarifárias, gerando um conjunto cada vez mais abrangente e complexo de direitos e obrigações. Ao mesmo tempo, os negociadores se aventuraram em novas áreas de política, fora das que se relacionam puramente com o comércio de mercadorias, buscando assegurar que o sistema seja igual à tarefa de gerenciar as relações econômicas internacionais no mundo de hoje. A Rodada Uruguai, recentemente completada, é o exemplo mais claro de como nossa agenda se expandiu para acompanhar os tempos. A Rodada Uruguai transformou o GATT na Organização Mundial do Comércio, colocando o sistema comercial em bases institucionais coerentes e sólidas. Foi criado um novo procedimento integrado de solução de controvérsias para garantir adjudicações rápidas, objetivas e neutras quando surgem conflitos comerciais entre os governos. A Rodada também fez progressos significativos em setores em que as políticas protecionistas foram mais resilientes, principalmente na agricultura e nos têxteis, e disciplinas mais fortes foram estabelecidas em subsídios, comércio estadual, normas técnicas e procedimentos de licenciamento, para citar alguns. A Rodada Uruguai foi a primeira a abordar o comércio de serviços e proteção de direitos de propriedade intelectual. Este compromisso contínuo com a liberalização do comércio e a concorrência reforçada é um contributo fundamental dos governos vislumbrantes para a atividade econômica globalizada. A globalização, ao que me refiro a uma multiplicidade de relações econômicas interligadas entre as economias nacionais, é uma conseqüência natural dos avanços tecnológicos em comunicações e transportes. Também foi encorajado pelo ambiente favorável que as regras e os compromissos de acesso ao mercado do sistema multilateral fornecem. Assim, a política governamental de apoio e a tecnologia moderna induziram empresas e empreendedores a operar - como a maioria desejam naturalmente - através das fronteiras de uma maneira que teria sido muito difícil há vinte ou trinta anos atrás. A evidência da integração global é clara na forma como o crescimento do comércio superou o crescimento da produção ano após ano - cada aumento de 10% na produção mundial tem sido associado a um aumento de 16% no comércio mundial. Essa tendência está acelerando no último ano o aumento do comércio mundial foi quase o triplo do crescimento da produção mundial. Essa relação crescente do comércio mundial com a produção mundial não só mostra a crescente interdependência entre as nações. Ao chamar a atenção para o fato de que o comércio internacional mostrou consistentemente maior dinamismo do que a produção ao longo do período pós-guerra, também destaca o papel central do comércio internacional no crescimento econômico pós-guerra. Há aqueles que gostariam de colocar o relógio de volta, para desejar a dependência mútua das nações. Mas ninguém pode parar o curso da história. A interdependência fez um enorme contributo para o aumento da renda e da paz entre as nações, e está aqui para ficar - e crescer. O desafio que enfrentamos é como fazê-lo funcionar para todas as nações e trabalhar melhor. Este é um desafio formidável, é verdade. Mas os eventos recentes também nos apresentaram uma oportunidade histórica, a chance de definir algo diferente e durável nas relações internacionais. Os pressupostos políticos de longa data e previsíveis da Guerra Fria tornaram-se irrelevantes. As relações Norte-Sul, dominadas tantas vezes no passado por uma polarização desnecessária e um diálogo de surdos, também mudaram irrevogavelmente. Embora o colapso do comunismo tenha sido vividamente simbolizado pela queda do muro de Berlim, nenhuma imagem desse tipo chamou a atenção para as mudanças que ocorreram nas relações entre países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento. No entanto, essas mudanças serão tão importantes. Do ponto de vista do sistema de comércio multilateral, então, o que tudo isso significa. Nós enfrentamos uma tarefa dupla. Devemos ampliar o alcance do sistema geograficamente para torná-lo verdadeiramente global, e também devemos garantir que ele continue efetivo em face da crescente complexidade nas relações econômicas internacionais. Todos estarão cientes do debate contínuo na União Europeia sobre as escolhas entre o alargamento geográfico da União eo aprofundamento das suas disposições substantivas. Este é um debate politicamente carregado porque o alargamento e o aprofundamento são frequentemente vistos como alternativas concorrentes. Mas para o sistema de comércio multilateral, estas não são alternativas. Precisamente porque a OMC aspira a ser uma entidade verdadeiramente global e comercialmente relevante, temos de pressionar simultaneamente em ambas as frentes. No que diz respeito à extensão geográfica, enfrentamos uma série de desafios. Primeiro, a duzia ou mais estados criados pelo colapso da União Soviética procuraram, ou logo estarão buscando, membros da OMC. O processo de adesão das Russias está em andamento, assim como os de vários outros países da ex-União Soviética, incluindo os países bálticos, a Ucrânia e a Armênia. O trabalho sobre o relacionamento da Chinas com o GATT está em andamento há cerca de dez anos. Trazer a China, a Rússia e outras economias em transição para a OMC como participantes completos é um objetivo fundamental para os próximos meses e anos. Nos velhos tempos, as economias de planejamento central, como a Polônia, a Romênia e a Hungria, podiam aderir ao GATT na ausência de qualquer esforço sério de reforma econômica. Foram elaborados protocolos especiais de adesão. Esses protocolos reconheceram que as oportunidades de negociação não seriam criadas pelas forças do mercado, pelo que elas se baseavam em compromissos de expansão das importações, ao mesmo tempo que permitiam a persistência de acordos comerciais discriminatórios. Mas a conveniência política e a relevância econômica limitada desses acordos não tem lugar na OMC hoje. As economias de transição estão envolvidas em transformações econômicas dramáticas e difíceis para um sistema baseado no mercado. Os termos em que aderem à OMC devem contribuir para o processo de reforma e devem ser realistas. Mas o tamanho e o poder econômico que alguns desses países representam também tornam importante garantir que os termos de adesão apoiem plenamente a integridade do sistema comercial da OMC. A coerência do sistema não deve ser sacrificada na busca da universalidade - mesmo que a universalidade seja o objetivo final, porque um sistema comercial global que exclui uma proporção significativa dos mundos é uma contradição em termos. A outra revolução geopolítica no sistema comercial é o salto na participação dos países em desenvolvimento. Ao longo da última década, dezenas de países em desenvolvimento mudaram para políticas comerciais liberais e maior dependência da concorrência internacional para gerar renda e crescimento. Mais de 70 países em desenvolvimento realizaram medidas de liberalização unilateral nos últimos dez anos. Esse processo arruinou a antiga divisão Norte-Sul. Muitos países com níveis bastante diferentes de renda e desenvolvimento colocaram sua fé no sistema comercial da OMC para a continuidade, a estabilidade e a promessa de oportunidades comerciais. Isso não significa que os interesses e as prioridades dos países sejam idênticos. Embora parte do trabalho da OMC seja definir o interesse comum sempre que possível e promover a ação conjunta, os países não podem ser coagidos, eles devem ser trazidos ao longo do reconhecimento de seu próprio interesse. Assim, à medida que a OMC se torna uma instituição mais inclusiva e abrangente, ela deve acomodar uma ampla gama de interesses. Isso pode ser mais difícil do que em um mundo mais antigo e mais simples, dominado por alguns países com idéias afim, mas temos que ter sucesso e o sucesso será pelo menos tão gratificante. No entanto, como eu disse, diferentes membros da OMC do país em desenvolvimento têm interesses diferentes. Enquanto muitos países continuam a crescer e se modernizar, gerando riqueza suficiente para tornar seu povo progressivamente melhor, alguns países em desenvolvimento de baixa renda não compartilham claramente o aumento da prosperidade global. Nenhuma sociedade pode participar efetivamente nas oportunidades de um mercado global se muitos de seus cidadãos não possuam as necessidades básicas da vida. Nós carregamos uma responsabilidade compartilhada para fornecer as condições para que esses países se separem. No que diz respeito ao sistema comercial, devemos fazer o nosso melhor para ver que os países em desenvolvimento de baixa renda podem diversificar sua produção de exportação e expandir seus mercados de exportação numa base competitiva. Na OMC, estamos desenvolvendo um programa especial para a África, em particular, que visa ajudar os governos a tirar melhor partido do comércio internacional e das oportunidades de investimento estrangeiro. Este é um esforço modesto, e é preciso fazer mais, especialmente em colaboração com outras instituições econômicas multilaterais. Tanto para a tarefa que enfrentamos para tornar o sistema de comércio da OMC verdadeiramente universal em um sentido geográfico. O que sobre o aprofundamento do sistema Ao pressionar a liberalização, com sucesso fornecendo um caminho a seguir em áreas de comércio, onde o protecionismo há muito se revelou intratável e, abordando atrevidamente aspectos inteiramente novos, mas muito importantes do comércio, o Uruguay Round fez um sinal de contribuição Para as relações comerciais internacionais. Foi uma conquista histórica para criar a OMC. Mas, após qualquer nascimento, a prole deve ser nutrida. Vejo três grandes desafios à nossa nova instituição nos próximos anos. O primeiro é consolidar o que fizemos. O segundo é dar substância à nossa agenda de negociação integrada, que essencialmente constitui um negócio inacabado que emana da Rodada. O terceiro é encontrar os novos desafios que já se acumulam no horizonte. Permita-me dizer um pouco sobre cada um destes. Primeiro, consolidação ou implementação. A grande variedade de assuntos que foram abordados na Rodada do Uruguai é assustadora, mesmo para as mãos comerciais mais difíceis. Os textos dos resultados compreendem não menos de 19 acordos, 24 decisões, oito entendimentos e três declarações. Alguns desses textos são, obviamente, mais importantes do que outros, mas juntos representam quase 500 páginas de linguagem cuidadosamente trabalhada, repletas de compromissos. (Talvez eu não deva mencionar as outras 24.000 páginas de compromissos específicos de acesso ao mercado). Para alguns países, vários desses compromissos coincidirão com as políticas existentes. Em outros casos, eles pedem mudanças. É necessário um esforço concertado para todos os membros da OMC para consolidar os resultados da Rodada Uruguai e garantir o pleno cumprimento. É uma questão aberta se as medidas de integração progressiva para alguns desses compromissos devem ser aceleradas. Por minha parte, não consigo ver por que os benefícios da liberalização em qualquer país devem ser adiados um dia mais do que o absolutamente necessário. Mesmo que sejam, os compromissos exigem um trabalho constante e contínuo nas capitais nacionais e na OMC no dia-a-dia. É uma atividade que raramente capta as manchetes, mas é essencial para o bom funcionamento do sistema. No entanto, a nossa maior prioridade a curto prazo é garantir que o novo sistema de solução de controvérsias funcione de forma legal e politicamente credível. Quando surgem dificuldades e desentendimentos, as disposições da consulta, conciliação e resolução de litígios da OMC podem ser levadas em ação. A vontade de cumprir os procedimentos e conclusões de solução de controvérsias é tão importante quanto respeitar as regras. Com apenas nove meses de experiência sob nossos cintos, acho que já podemos ser encorajados pela operação do novo sistema. Primeiro, os governos estão fazendo uso dela de uma maneira que demonstra uma fé considerável na OMC. Cerca de 20 casos chegaram ao órgão de resolução de litígios - um número muito maior do que em qualquer ano da existência de 47 anos do GATTs. Em segundo lugar, o procedimento automático rápido, juntamente com o conhecimento de que, na sua conclusão, o sistema é executável parece estar concentrando mentes e encorajando assentamentos rápidos através do processo consultivo inicial - a recente disputa EUA-Japão sobre carros e peças sobressalentes é um desses casos. E esse é o objetivo - resolver disputas comerciais rapidamente, e não, principalmente, gerar jurisprudência. É claro que muitas disputas seguirão seu curso completo e não tenho dúvidas de que seremos capazes de produzir julgamentos objetivos, claros e bem discutidos que irão comandar a confiança dos governos e dos legisladores em todos os lugares. Ninguém precisa ter medo de conclusões arbitrárias ou de uma falta de neutralidade por parte dos painéis de controvérsia da OMC ou do novo Órgão de Apelação. Para todos os países, foram criadas obrigações novas e detalhadas para notificar políticas e medidas, para que os parceiros comerciais possam estar confiantes de que tenham pleno conhecimento das demais políticas. A transparência é um ingrediente essencial para promover a confiança mútua e incentivar o respeito pelas regras. De fato, um dos resultados da Rodada Uruguai foi a criação de um mecanismo de revisão da política comercial, pelo qual as políticas comerciais dos membros individuais da OMC são examinadas multilateralmente por turno e em profundidade. Esses exames proporcionam uma oportunidade para que os países mantenham trocas de visão francas e não litigiosas sobre as políticas dos outros. Eles são um valioso contributo para a transparência e ajudam a aumentar a conscientização entre parceiros comerciais de questões políticas. Em negociações comerciais multilaterais anteriores, os negócios inacabados tenderam a refletir a falta de concordância em questões bastante fundamentais, como fazer qualquer coisa sobre agricultura ou têxteis, ou se deseja redesenhar as regras sobre medidas de salvaguarda. Este não foi o caso na Rodada Uruguai. No entanto, no final das negociações em 1993, ficou claro que seria necessário um tempo extra em alguns setores-chave. Isto é mais claro no campo dos serviços, onde já realizamos negociações pós-negociação do Uruguai sobre o comércio de serviços financeiros e a circulação de pessoas singulares, e estamos no meio das negociações sobre a abertura dos serviços básicos de telecomunicações e transporte marítimo. Nós certamente não conseguimos tudo o que gostaríamos nas negociações de serviços financeiros e pessoas físicas, mas fizemos progresso. Nos serviços financeiros, em particular, cerca de trinta países assumiram compromissos valiosos e de abertura de mercado adicionais. As negociações sobre telecomunicações básicas devem ser concluídas até o final de abril do próximo ano. Eles abrirão novas e importantes oportunidades de comércio e investimento. As negociações coincidem com as tendências da indústria para a liberalização, atribuíveis tanto à pressão das indústrias de usuários como ao rápido desenvolvimento tecnológico. Mas existe, no entanto, resistência à erradicação dos acordos de abastecimento de monopólio em muitos países, e uma ação multilateral concertada oferece a melhor esperança de conseguir resultados de longo alcance. O sucesso nestas negociações significará que os operadores de telecomunicações devem poder oferecer um amplo espectro de serviços a preços competitivos, tanto nos mercados nacionais como internacionais. Os Estados Unidos estão na vanguarda desta negociação, com um dos mercados de telecomunicações mais liberais e de baixo custo do mundo. É por isso que o seu compromisso com um resultado multilateral genuíno é de vital importância. Precisamos de um forte resultado das negociações da OMC se quisermos tornar a visão da Sociedade Global da Informação realidade - com tudo o que isso significará para revitalizar as economias, transformar nossas sociedades e capacitar as pessoas. As negociações sobre os serviços de transporte marítimo, por outro lado, tratam de um dos mais antigos meios de troca entre os povos, um dos quais mantém sua importância fundamental para o fluxo de comércio de mercadorias. As produtíssimas melhorias na tecnologia de navegação nos últimos anos precisam ser acompanhadas por melhorias no ambiente político em que esses navios navegam. Isso também é uma negociação em que existem posições firmemente ocupadas, e é essencial que continuemos lembrando que é tão válido e importante quanto as negociações em outras áreas. Outra parte do negócio inacabado do Uruguay Rounds é a agenda integrada para o trabalho futuro. Isso compreende vários elementos. Os membros da OMC já estabeleceram um mandato para entrar em uma sucessiva rodada de negociações no comércio de serviços, com o objetivo de alcançar níveis progressivamente mais altos de liberalização. A primeira dessas negociações deve começar dentro de cinco anos. Da mesma forma, na agricultura os membros estão empenhados em participar de negociações visando novas reduções no apoio e proteção agrícola. O prazo previsto é o mesmo que para os serviços. Esses compromissos e alguns outros no Acordo da OMC refletem claramente o reconhecimento da necessidade de uma liberalização comercial contínua e incremental - um círculo virtuoso de esforços cooperativos globais que são a base de um sistema multilateral efetivo. Depois, há a chamada agenda citada - as questões que, à medida que o processo de integração econômica global continua, sugerem-se, naturalmente, como prováveis ​​assuntos para o Programa de Trabalho da OMC do futuro. Uma das primeiras questões que já está no programa de trabalho da OMC é a relação entre comércio e meio ambiente. No cerne da questão, é como relacionamos o sistema de comércio multilateral baseado em regras, a continuação da liberalização do comércio e o desenvolvimento da economia global para preocupações e objetivos ambientais. É possível prever circunstâncias em que o comércio, não apoiado por uma política ambiental sólida, possa causar danos ao meio ambiente - ou, pelo contrário, em que as regulamentações ambientais podem prejudicar o comércio legítimo. Em tais circunstâncias, no entanto, um julgamento cuidadoso é necessário para pesar se é política comercial ou política ambiental que deve ser ajustada. Também não é difícil ver como os acordos ambientais internacionais mal considerados podem frustrar desnecessariamente o comércio e reduzir os rendimentos - e até mesmo colocar em risco a reforma e a melhoria ambiental. Ao mesmo tempo, é tão importante reconhecer as circunstâncias em que, ao incentivar a eficiência e uma melhor alocação de recursos escassos, a liberalização do comércio pode apoiar um ambiente melhorado. Estou otimista de que nosso trabalho atual sobre o assunto na OMC contribuirá para uma melhor compreensão das questões e ajudará os governos no desenvolvimento de políticas mais coerentes nesta área. O comércio e o investimento são um candidato líder para a nova agenda, uma vez que uma das conseqüências da globalização é diminuir as distinções entre diferentes formas de acesso ao mercado. No quadro do GATT, costumávamos pensar no acesso ao mercado simplesmente em termos de tarifas e medidas não-tarifárias. Reduzir as tarifas e eliminar outras barreiras comerciais na fronteira foi a receita para a liberalização. O investimento estrangeiro era uma questão completamente diferente. De fato, os países costumavam considerar tarifas e outras barreiras comerciais como mecanismos convenientes para induzir o investimento estrangeiro. A proteção do mercado doméstico ofereceu lucros atrativos para investidores estrangeiros. Esta foi a essência da estratégia de desenvolvimento de substituição de importações - uma estratégia que, em grande medida, falhou e agora foi desacreditada. No mundo atual de negócios internacionais, comércio e investimento são cada vez mais vistos como complementos, e não como substitutos. Diferentes partes de empresas de base internacional podem ser localizadas em vários países diferentes. Cada vez mais, as empresas negociam para investir e investem para trocar. A OMC não pode se preocupar apenas com o lado comercial da equação - isso seria negar a realidade das modernas práticas comerciais globais. Não é por acaso que os fluxos de investimento estrangeiro direto em todo o mundo quadruplicaram, quase US200 bilhões por ano, nos dez anos até 1993. De fato, a importância do investimento foi reconhecida no Acordo Geral sobre o Comércio de Serviços negociado no Uruguay Round, onde o investimento , Ou presença comercial, foi um dos quatro modos de fornecimento de serviços em relação aos quais membros da OMC assumiram compromissos de acesso ao mercado. Mas acho que precisamos de uma abordagem mais ampla ou mais horizontal das regras internacionais de investimento. Essas regras baseiam-se nos princípios da OMC de não discriminação e tratamento nacional e criam um ambiente político para incentivar e proteger o investimento estrangeiro, seja em bens ou serviços. A OCDE já começou a trabalhar nessa direção, mas acredito que os governos reconhecerão cada vez mais a necessidade de trabalhar em investimentos em um cenário mais global. Especialmente, uma vez que os países em desenvolvimento não são apenas o alvo de uma proporção crescente de investimentos internacionais, mas também se tornam importantes investidores estrangeiros. Devo notar que o Acordo da Rodada Uruguai sobre Medidas de Investimento Relacionadas ao Comércio exige um exame pelos membros dentro de cinco anos após o caso para o desenvolvimento de disposições sobre política de investimentos. Esse mesmo mandato refere-se à política de concorrência, que também teremos de examinar como um possível candidato para novos trabalhos. Claro, o que fizemos no GATT e na OMC há mais de 50 anos na promoção de um ambiente comercial liberal é precisamente o aumento da concorrência. Mas, se conseguimos obter as regras da concorrência entre os países para trabalhar efetivamente, esse mesmo sucesso nos obriga a avançar e considerar como o comportamento das empresas pode prejudicar a concorrência internacional. Precisamos ver se existem áreas onde regras de concorrência explícitas, ou entendimentos específicos, são necessários internacionalmente para complementar os estatutos que muitos governos já possuem em seus livros. Não tenho dúvidas de que as regras da concorrência são essenciais para o bom funcionamento dos mercados - o que precisamos esclarecer, no entanto, é a melhor maneira de promover essas disciplinas, tanto a nível nacional como internacional. Alguns membros da OMC gostariam que a nova agenda inclua o assunto do comércio e das normas sociais. Esta é uma questão altamente controversa e, na ausência de um consenso, não há possibilidade de que ela possa ser inserida na agenda da OMC. É claro que o que precisamos antes e principalmente é um esforço abrangente para trazer alguma clareza para os muitos problemas complexos que estão envolvidos aqui. A primeira questão a ser esclarecida é a natureza do assunto, estamos falando sobre a vantagem comparativa dos países em desenvolvimento, que vem dos níveis salariais mais baixos - como a questão às vezes é apresentada - ou estamos falando de direitos humanos ou padrões trabalhistas? É fundamentalmente importante Para esclarecer os termos do debate em relação ao comércio. O segundo ponto é identificar quais são as principais questões relacionadas ao comércio, por exemplo, estamos falando sobre o trabalho infantil ou os direitos sindicais em termos de padrões trabalhistas ou em termos de direitos humanos. Estas são apenas algumas das condições prévias para a abertura de uma discussão sobre Se um debate útil é de fato possível sobre essas questões. Felizmente, não estamos começando de zero. O debate sobre esta questão começou de fato na conferência de paz de Versalhes e alguns dos princípios envolvidos foram refletidos no Artigo XX do GATT desde o início. Na ONU, na OCDE, na OIT e nas administrações nacionais, o debate realizou progressos valiosos e até produziu algumas medidas práticas. I would like to refer especially to the most recent work of the ILO, in order to identify some principles that could be important for any discussion in the WTO. These principles have been presented as quotshared valuesquot without any dissent from the ILOs membership. One of these principles is that economic and social growth and development are to a large extent interdependent. When the economic situation is poor, the social situation is also likely to be poor. And correspondingly, where there is economic growth, social development is more likely to come too. While no-one should challenge the legitimate right of developing countries to use the comparative advantage of lower costs, and no-one should use human rights and issues of social standards as an excuse for disguised protectionism, no country should deliberately deny workers rights or attempt to generate artificially-lower costs by forced labour, discrimination against women, exploitation of children or other such abuses. We should on no account allow this debate to re-open a North-South divide. Dialogue is the best approach to finding ways to improve the observance of labour standards. Finally, the ILO has recognised the necessity of improving its means of acting on these issues. I wanted to underline these points presented by the chairperson of the ILOs Working Party on the Social Dimensions of the Liberalization of International Trade earlier this year because I think that on the basis of these shared values there is the possibility of establishing the starting point for a discussion of the issue. I also believe that in order to convince developing countries that no protectionist considerations are involved in the debate, it is essential to prove that all possible measures other than trade sanctions are being taken to alleviate the problems. One excellent example is the Memorandum of Understanding on the elimination of child labour from the garments industry in Bangladesh that was signed in July of this year by the industry, the ILO and UNICEF, with support from the Bangladesh and US Governments. This joint approach combines restrictions on child labour with the improvement of educational opportunities for the children involved. This is a targeted and constructive approach to a specific problem, and as such I believe it offers a useful model for future efforts. On the other hand, to simply restrict imports of garments from the industries concerned would in all likelihood have just worsened the situation of these children. Let me sum up my thinking on this issue by repeating the need that I see for a wide-ranging and comprehensive consideration of the issues only in this way will it be possible to generate the necessary confidence to build consensus for a discussion on whether, and how, they relate to trade. Last but not least, I should like to say a few words about two related subjects - reciprocity and the growth of regionalism in international trade relations. There are from time to time calls for trade policies based on reciprocity instead of the basic MFN principle. These are based on the assumption that the degree of liberalization already reached by certain countries does not give them any real defence in a multilateral negotiation vis--vis those countries whose liberalization process is much less advanced. Advocates of reciprocity argue that such countries have no real incentive to deeper liberalization, given their benefits from the MFN system. I would like to make a couple of points on this question. The first is that to present reciprocity as an alternative to MFN is a major departure from the trading system we have built up over 50 years, and it is just the opposite of what the founding fathers of the multilateral system envisaged. Secondly, I can understand that a nation or regional group which believes itself to be an open market has the right to fight hard to obtain from all its partners the greatest possible degree of liberalization. If this argument is used tactically and temporarily as a negotiating device, there is less need for alarm over its implications for the system as a whole. But if it becomes a permanent instrument of policy, then the risk for the multilateral system could become serious. Trade is technical in its substance but highly political in its consequences. Reciprocity as a structural alternative to the multilateral system equals bilateralism bilateralism equals discrimination and trade relations based on power rather than rules are the result. This would be a very dangerous departure from the success story of the multilateral system. The growth of regionalism is a more complex issue. There is no natural contradiction between regionalism and the multilateral system. This has been the shared assessment of the great majority of the international trade community. The real contradiction, it must always be emphasised, is between open trade and protectionism. Regional trade initiatives can certainly help to lower trade barriers and thus promote economic growth. But the relationship between regionalism and a multilateral system based on the MFN principle is nonetheless a complex one. The provisions of the GATT have sought to ensure compatibility by requiring regional agreements to cover substantially all trade among the partners and to promote trade policies which do not lead to higher protection or extra restrictions on the trade of non-members. In practice, however, it has been almost impossible to assess the consistency of regional agreements with the multilateral system under these provisions. Since the creation of the GATT nearly 50 years ago, 108 regional agreements have been notified. Eighty existing agreements have so far been examined, and only six have been found consistent with the rules I mentioned above (the EU is not one of them). In recent times 20 new regional agreements have been notified, and are waiting to be examined in the WTO. It will come as no surprise that inconclusive results are likely here as well. Clearly there is a need to improve the rules and the procedures under which the WTOs members can assess this crucial relationship. But it is also clear that the legal issues are only part of the story. The relation between regional and multilateral liberalization in practice has been a different and generally more positive story. For example, successive enlargements of the European Union have been followed by multilateral trade negotiations, which have maintained a de facto link between progress at the regional level and at the multilateral level. These links are the reason why most people have seen regional agreements as building blocks for multilateral free trade. Is the situation changing, and do we need to adjust this generally positive perception Let me suggest some considerations. Until quite recently, there was only one large regional grouping, and that was limited to a number of western European countries. The US was historically opposed to regionalism. But this situation has changed. Since the 1980s, the US has begun to build its own regional agreements, through free trade with Canada, through NAFTA, and through APEC, etc. Now, almost all the member countries of the WTO also belong to a regional trade agreement. The importance of regional agreements as a means of tariff reduction has declined (this is also thanks to the success of the GATT). Regional agreements are becoming more and more important in terms of trade rules, and for the political weight they represent in international negotiations. These are elements which could break up the parallelism between regional and multilateral progress there is the risk that antagonism between regional groups could make progress in the multilateral system more difficult. Furthermore, regional initiatives such as the suggestions for a trans-Atlantic free trade area could give the impression of re-erecting a discriminatory divide between the rich North and the poorer South. The conclusion I draw is that we must be very attentive to strengthening the linkage which has existed up to now between regional and multilateral progress. What this means in practical terms is that regional liberalization initiatives must proceed almost in tandem with multilateral ones. What countries are willing to do regionally, they must then be willing to do multilaterally, so as to keep this parallelism between regional and multilateral commitments. At the core of this relationship, there is the basic question of the kind of international system we want: a global system based on the principle of non-discrimination embodied in agreed and enforceable rules, or a world divided into regional blocs with all the consequences this would imply for political stability and security. To sum up, it is clear that the challenges facing the multilateral trading system are about much more than trade matters as they used to be defined. I know that for some people - and for some countries too - the pace of change is unsettling and even alarming. Whether in the challenges that the information revolution presents to anyone over 30, or in the pace of economic globalization, there is an understandable reflex which asks the world to slow down a little. However, we know it will not. If we decrease our imports from the developing countries, we decrease their growth and our growth alike. And the growth of many developing countries will be the most powerful engine for growth in developed countries. At the same time, if we reduce export opportunities for developing countries we only increase unemployment and poverty in these countries, and further restrict opportunities for their young people. And if we try to close our borders both to goods and to people we will just increase instability, violence, war and terrorism. So the only sustainable policy for us and for the developing countries is to continue a strong commitment to openness. That is why we need to keep the multilateral system, with its reliable framework of principles and rules in good repair it is a firm foothold in a shifting world. Liberalization within the multilateral system means that this unstoppable process can be implemented within internationally agreed rules and disciplines. This is the opposite of a chaotic and unchecked process - without the security of the multilateral system, change would indeed be a leap in the dark. At the same time, the multilateral system is becoming more and more a political issue. This is happening because its evolution increasingly concerns national regulatory policies more than cross-border obstacles and it is happening because the challenges to the system are increasingly political rather than technical. In this context, it could become very important to consider the possibility of strengthening the institutional basis of the system - for example by enhancing the political dimension of its central institution, the WTO. It is my profound conviction that the confluence of political and economic events of the last few years places us on the threshold of an unusual historic opportunity: that of establishing a truly global system for the conduct of international economic relations, a system that responds readily to change and to changing needs, and one for which every nation will wish to claim ownership. Let us rise to this challenge, just as Spaak and the other builders of the postwar world did to theirs. Their achievements have shaped our present, and they should inspire our future. WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION UNDERSTANDING THE WTO: BASICS Principles of the trading system The WTO agreements are lengthy and complex because they are legal texts covering a wide range of activities. Eles lidam com: agricultura, têxteis e roupas, bancos, telecomunicações, compras governamentais, padrões industriais e segurança de produtos, regulamentos de saneamento de alimentos, propriedade intelectual e muito mais. Mas uma série de princípios simples e fundamentais são executados em todos esses documentos. Esses princípios são a base do sistema multilateral de comércio. Um olhar mais atento sobre estes princípios: clique no botão para abrir um item. Uma árvore para navegação no site será aberta aqui se você ativar o JavaScript no seu navegador. 1. Nação mais favorecida (MFN): tratar outras pessoas de forma igual nos termos dos acordos da OMC, os países normalmente não podem discriminar entre seus parceiros comerciais. Conceda a alguém um favor especial (como uma taxa de direito aduaneiro mais baixo para um de seus produtos) e você deve fazer o mesmo para todos os outros membros da OMC. Este princípio é conhecido como tratamento de nação mais favorecida (NMF) (ver caixa). É tão importante que seja o primeiro artigo do Acordo Geral sobre Tarifas e Comércio (GATT). Que rege o comércio de bens. A NMF também é uma prioridade no Acordo Geral sobre Comércio de Serviços (AGCS) (Artigo 2) e no Acordo sobre os Aspectos dos Direitos de Propriedade Intelectual Relacionados com o Comércio (TRIPS) (Artigo 4), embora em cada acordo o princípio seja tratado de forma ligeiramente diferente . Juntos, esses três acordos abrangem as três principais áreas de comércio tratadas pela OMC. Algumas exceções são permitidas. Por exemplo, os países podem estabelecer um acordo de comércio livre que se aplica apenas a bens comercializados dentro do grupo discriminando produtos de fora. Ou podem oferecer aos países em desenvolvimento um acesso especial aos seus mercados. Ou um país pode criar barreiras contra produtos que são considerados negociados de forma injusta em países específicos. E em serviços, os países podem, em circunstâncias limitadas, discriminar. Mas os acordos só permitem essas exceções em condições estritas. Em geral, o NMF significa que cada vez que um país abaixa uma barreira comercial ou abre um mercado, tem que fazê-lo pelos mesmos bens ou serviços de todos os seus parceiros comerciais, sejam eles ricos ou pobres, fracos ou fortes. 2. Tratamento nacional: o tratamento de estrangeiros e locais de origem. Os bens importados e produzidos localmente devem ser tratados pelo menos, pelo menos, depois que os bens estrangeiros entraram no mercado. O mesmo deve ser aplicado aos serviços nacionais e estrangeiros, bem como a marcas comerciais, direitos autorais e patentes estrangeiras e locais. Este princípio de tratamento nacional (que dá aos outros o mesmo tratamento que os próprios nacionais) também é encontrado em todos os três principais acordos da OMC (artigo 3º do GATT, artigo 17 do AGCS e artigo 3º do TRIPS), embora mais uma vez o princípio seja tratado Um pouco diferente em cada um destes. O tratamento nacional só se aplica quando um produto, serviço ou item de propriedade intelectual entrou no mercado. Por conseguinte, a cobrança de direitos aduaneiros sobre uma importação não constitui uma violação do tratamento nacional, mesmo que os produtos produzidos localmente não sejam cobrados de um imposto equivalente. Comércio mais livre: gradualmente, através da negociação de volta ao topo Abaixar as barreiras comerciais é um dos meios mais óbvios de encorajar o comércio. As barreiras em questão incluem direitos aduaneiros (ou tarifas) e medidas como proibições de importação ou cotas que restringem as quantidades seletivamente. De tempos em tempos, outras questões, como a burocracia e as políticas cambiais, também foram discutidas. Desde a criação do GATT em 1947-48, houve oito rodadas de negociações comerciais. Uma nona rodada, no âmbito da Agenda de Desenvolvimento de Doha, está em andamento. No início, estes focaram na redução de tarifas (direitos aduaneiros) em bens importados. Como resultado das negociações, em meados da década de 1990, as taxas arancelarias dos países industrializados sobre os bens industriais caíram de forma constante para menos de 4. Mas, na década de 1980, as negociações se expandiram para cobrir barreiras não tarifárias sobre os bens e para as novas áreas Tais como serviços e propriedade intelectual. Abertura de mercados pode ser benéfica, mas também requer ajuste. Os acordos da OMC permitem que os países introduzam mudanças gradualmente, através da liberalização progressiva. Os países em desenvolvimento geralmente são mais demorados para cumprir suas obrigações. Previsibilidade: através da vinculação e transparência de volta ao topo Às vezes, prometer não criar uma barreira comercial pode ser tão importante quanto a redução de um, porque a promessa dá às empresas uma visão mais clara das suas oportunidades futuras. Com estabilidade e previsibilidade, o investimento é encorajado, os empregos são criados e os consumidores podem aproveitar plenamente os benefícios da escolha da concorrência e preços mais baixos. O sistema multilateral de comércio é uma tentativa dos governos de tornar o ambiente empresarial estável e previsível. O Uruguay Round aumentou as ligações Percentagens de tarifas vinculadas antes e depois das conversas de 1986-94 (São linhas tarifárias, portanto as percentagens não são ponderadas de acordo com o volume ou valor comercial) Na OMC, quando os países concordam em abrir seus mercados por bens ou serviços , Eles comprometem seus compromissos. Para os bens, estas ligações equivalem a limites máximos das tarifas aduaneiras. Às vezes, os países importam as importações a taxas inferiores às taxas consolidadas. Freqüentemente, esse é o caso nos países em desenvolvimento. Nos países desenvolvidos, as taxas realmente cobradas e as taxas consolidadas tendem a ser as mesmas. Um país pode mudar suas ligações, mas apenas depois de negociar com seus parceiros comerciais, o que poderia significar compensá-los pela perda de comércio. Uma das realizações das negociações comerciais do Uruguay Round foi aumentar o volume de negócios sob compromissos vinculativos (ver tabela). Na agricultura, 100 dos produtos agora possuem tarifas consolidadas. O resultado de tudo isso: um grau substancialmente maior de segurança do mercado para comerciantes e investidores. O sistema também tenta melhorar a previsibilidade e a estabilidade de outras formas. Uma maneira é desencorajar o uso de cotas e outras medidas usadas para estabelecer limites sobre as quantidades de importações que administram cotas podem levar a mais burocracia e acusações de jogo injusto. Outro é fazer com que os países negociem regras tão claras quanto públicas (transparentes) quanto possível. Muitos acordos da OMC exigem que os governos divulguem suas políticas e práticas publicamente no país ou notificando a OMC. A vigilância regular das políticas comerciais nacionais através do Mecanismo de Revisão das Políticas Comerciais constitui um meio adicional de incentivar a transparência, tanto no plano nacional quanto a nível multilateral. A OMC às vezes é descrita como uma instituição de livre comércio, mas isso não é inteiramente exato. O sistema permite tarifas e, em circunstâncias limitadas, outras formas de proteção. Mais precisamente, é um sistema de regras dedicado à competição aberta, justa e não distorcida. As regras em matéria de não discriminação e tratamento nacional NMN destinam-se a garantir condições equitativas de comércio. Assim também são aqueles em dumping (exportando abaixo do custo para ganhar participação de mercado) e subsídios. As questões são complexas e as regras tentam estabelecer o que é justo ou injusto e como os governos podem responder, em particular mediante a cobrança de taxas de importação adicionais calculadas para compensar os danos causados ​​pelo comércio injusto. Muitos dos outros acordos da OMC visam apoiar a concorrência leal: na agricultura, propriedade intelectual, serviços, por exemplo. O acordo sobre contratos públicos (um acordo plurilateral porque é assinado por apenas alguns membros da OMC) estende as regras da concorrência às compras de milhares de entidades governamentais em muitos países. E assim por diante. Incentivar o desenvolvimento e a reforma econômica de volta ao topo O sistema da OMC contribui para o desenvolvimento. Por outro lado, os países em desenvolvimento precisam de flexibilidade no tempo que tomam para implementar os acordos de sistemas. E os próprios acordos herdam as disposições anteriores do GATT que permitem assistência especial e concessões comerciais para países em desenvolvimento. Mais de três quartos dos membros da OMC são países em desenvolvimento e países em transição para economias de mercado. Durante os sete anos e meio da Rodada do Uruguai, mais de 60 desses países implementaram programas de liberalização comercial de forma autônoma. Ao mesmo tempo, os países em desenvolvimento e as economias em transição eram muito mais ativos e influentes nas negociações da Rodada Uruguai do que em qualquer rodada anterior, e ainda mais na atual Agenda de Doha para o Desenvolvimento. No final da Ronda do Uruguai, os países em desenvolvimento estavam preparados para assumir a maioria das obrigações exigidas aos países desenvolvidos. Mas os acordos lhes conferiram períodos de transição para se adaptar às disposições mais desconhecidas e, talvez, difíceis da OMC, particularmente para os países mais pobres e menos desenvolvidos. Uma decisão ministerial adotada no final da rodada diz que os países em melhor situação devem acelerar a implementação de compromissos de acesso ao mercado sobre os bens exportados pelos países menos desenvolvidos e busca maior assistência técnica para eles. Mais recentemente, os países desenvolvidos começaram a permitir importações duty-free e sem contingentes para quase todos os produtos dos países menos desenvolvidos. Com tudo isso, a OMC e seus membros ainda estão passando por um processo de aprendizagem. A atual Agenda de Doha para o Desenvolvimento inclui as preocupações dos países em desenvolvimento quanto às dificuldades que enfrentam na implementação dos acordos da Rodada Uruguai. O sistema de negociação deve ser. Sem discriminação, um país não deve discriminar entre seus parceiros comerciais (dando-lhes o status de país mais favorecido ou MFN) e não deve discriminar entre seus próprios produtos e serviços, nacionais ou nacionais (dando-lhes tratamento nacional) barreiras mais livres As negociações de empresas estrangeiras previsíveis, investidores e governos devem estar confiantes de que as barreiras comerciais (incluindo tarifas e barreiras não tarifárias) não devem ser levantadas de forma arbitrária e os compromissos de abertura de mercado estão vinculados na OMC mais competitivo desencorajando práticas desleais, como subsídios à exportação e Despejar produtos com custos inferiores para ganhar participação de mercado mais benéfico para os países menos desenvolvidos, dando-lhes mais tempo para ajustar, maior flexibilidade e privilégios especiais. Isso parece uma contradição. Isso sugere um tratamento especial, mas na OMC, na verdade, significa que a não discriminação trata praticamente todos igualmente. Isto é o que acontece. Cada membro trata todos os outros membros igualmente como parceiros comerciais mais favorecidos. Se um país melhora os benefícios que dá a um parceiro comercial, ele deve dar o mesmo melhor tratamento a todos os outros membros da OMC para que todos eles permaneçam mais favorecidos. O estado da nação mais favorecida (MFN) nem sempre significou tratamento igual. Os primeiros tratados bilaterais de NMF criaram clubes exclusivos entre os parceiros comerciais mais favoráveis ​​do país. No âmbito do GATT e agora a OMC, o clube MFN não é mais exclusivo. O princípio NMF garante que cada país aprecie seus mais de 140 colegas por igual. But there are some exceptions. The Challenges Facing the Multilateral Trading System in Addressing Global Public Policy Objectives Despite a record-breaking 14.5 per cent increase in world merchandise exports, the effects of the financial crisis and global recession are still hampering faster economic recovery. Relatively high oil prices combined with persistent unemployment and measures designed to reduce budget deficits have undermined short-term growth prospects. While SouthSouth trade continues to explode, trade imbalances i. e. the gap between exports and imports widened in 2010 compared to 2009 (though smaller than pre-crisis levels). Meanwhile, trade negotiations under the Doha Round have reached an impasse, generating uncertainties about the future of the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a negotiating forum. Under these circumstances, should the system rethink its decision-making process founded upon the predominance of member states, the principle of consensus and the notion of single undertaking, as some critics have suggested And, if so, how could such a reform agenda be initiated at the WTO Moreover, beyond the negotiating function of the WTO, the paralysis of the system also raises urgent questions about the ability of the system to respond to pressing challenges of our times, such as trade and climate change, or food security and price volatility. Index terms Thematic keywords160: What we are seeing today is the paralysis in the negotiating function of the WTO, whether it is on market access or on the rule-making. What we are facing is the inability of the WTO to adapt and adjust to emerging global trade priorities, those you cannot solve through bilateral deals. Pascal Lamy, at an informal heads of delegation meeting of the Trade Negotiating Committee, 26 July 2011 1 The 200809 financial crisis and the current sovereign debt crisis in Europe have not only highlighted the high level of economic interdependencies existing worldwide, but also the growing challenges in pursuing international collaborative actions to address urgent sustainable development challenges. In a rapidly changing multi-polar world in which economic wealth is progressively shifting towards the East and the South, and in which resource constraints have become increasingly pressing, international cooperation remains in crisis. The rise of emerging countries like China, India or Brazil and the relative decline of traditional economic powers have created new opportunities, as reflected by the unprecedented growth in SouthSouth trade observed over the last decade or so. However, it has also generated new tensions, not least between countries with large trade surpluses and those with growing trade deficits. Such tensions are equally palatable in international negotiations such as the ones dealing with climate change. 2 Meanwhile, the number of hungry people is estimated to have reached one billion in 2009, catapulting food security back to the top of the political agenda. As growth in demand continues to rise faster than increases in supply due fundamentally to low productivity growth food prices are expected to remain high and volatile in the coming years. Several factors have contributed to enhancing price volatility: low stocks resulting from a succession of weather-related production shortfall, growing demand for biofuelsfeedstock, rising energy prices and a depreciation of the US dollar however, these have been aggravated by policy responses such as export restrictions. 3 This rapidly changing environment and the pressing needs for international cooperative action to address concerns around food security, climate change or unsustainable trade imbalances contrast sharply with the current paralysis of the multilateral trading system. The Doha Round of trade negotiations under the World Trade Organization (WTO) has now remained in a limbo for several months with no real perspectives for the near future. While several factors explain the stalemate in the ten-year-old trade talks, this paralysis raises uncertainties about the future of the multilateral trading system. 4 As a contribution to this discussion, this chapter looks at how the multilateral trading system has sought to address global public policy objectives, and how it can do so in the future. After a short review of current trends in international trade and recent developments which have led to the current crisis in the Doha Round, Section 3 considers possible options for reforming the way in which the WTO conducts negotiations. Finally, Section 4 focuses on how the WTO has sought to respond to specific public policy objectives in the past using the case of food security as an example and what this tells us about the way in which the multilateral trading system relates tobroader global public policy goals. 5 Following a sharp 12 per cent drop in 2009, the volume of world merchandise exports increased by a record-breaking 14.5 per cent in 2010, allowing global trade to recover to pre-crisis levels. This figure, the largest since data collection began in 1950, accompanied a 3.6 per cent increase in global gross domestic product (GDP). According to the WTO (WTO, 2011a), world trade growth should settle to a more modest 5.8 per cent in 2011, with a 2.5 per cent increase in global GDP (see Figure 9.1). Unsurprisingly, Asia exhibited the fastest real export growth 23.1 per cent with Chinese and Japanese exports increasing by 28.4 and 27.5 per cent, respectively. Meanwhile, merchandise trade grew by 10.8 per cent in Europe, and 15.4 per cent in the US. Overall developing countries and economies in transition accounted for 45 per cent of total world exports, the highest share ever (WTO, 2011a). 6 Rising commodity prices and a depreciating US currency meant that trade growth in dollar terms at 22 per cent exceeded the increase in volume terms. In particular, regions that rely on natural resource exports such as Africa, the Middle East or South America experienced lower growth in trade volumes but significant increases in the dollar value of their exports. African exports were up by 6.5 per cent in volume terms, but by 28 per cent in dollar terms. Similarly, Latin American exports grew by just 6.2 per cent in volume terms but by 25 per cent in dollar terms (WTO, 2011b). Figure 9.1 World merchandise exports and GDP, 200811 (in percentage change) Percentage change compared with same month of the previous year. Source: WTO (2011b). 7 Meanwhile, according to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), total foreign direct investments (FDI) increased from US1.185 to 1.244 trillion in 2010, largely due to increased flow to developing countries which, together with transition economies, accounted for more than half of total FDI (UNCTAD, 2011). Outward FDI from emerging economies also reached record highs, with most of their investment directed towards other countries in the South. 8 While these figures look impressive, the 2010 increase in merchandise trade did not suffice to return exports to levels consistent with 19902008 trends. On the investment front, despite a 5 per cent increase compared to 2009, global FDI flows have remained lower than their pre-crisis average (200507), and 37 per cent below their 2007 peak (UNCTAD, 2011). And while emerging economies in Latin America and South-East Asia experienced a rapid growth, FDI flows continued to contract in developed countries, Africa and South Asia. 9 More generally, as world output in 2009 was depressed, the WTO argues that higher growth in 2010 was to be expected, particularly as GDP growth often reached 4 per cent or more in recent years (WTO, 2011a). Several factors might explain why trade and output grew more slowly than they might have. In 2010, relatively high oil prices raised energy costs for households and business. High unemployment rates also affected domestic consumption and import demand in developed countries. Finally, attempts in Europe, the US and elsewhere to reduce budget deficits led to cuts in spending and revenue, undermining short-term growth prospects. The negative impacts of the financial crisis and global recession are therefore likely to remain for some time despite the record rebound of trade in 2010. 10 In the US, a low national savings rate and high private consumption as a share of GDP have continued to sustain demand for imported consumer goods, fuelling rapid export-led growth in emerging economies. Over the last 10 to 15 years, these developments have resulted in large imbalances, with sizeable current account deficits accumulating in the US in particular, and large current account surpluses in others, notably China, Germany and Japan. These have in turn generated political tensions, evident in the USChina controversy over exchange rate policies. In 2010, trade imbalances remained smaller than pre-crisis levels, but for most countries, except China, the gap between exports and imports widened compared to 2009 (see Figures 9.3 and 9.4). As Figure 9.2 shows, the US trade deficit increased from roughly US550 billion to US690 billion but remained lower than the US880 billion seen in 2008. Meanwhile, Chinas trade surplus fell from nearly US300 billion in 2008 to just over US180 billion in 2010. In 2010, the trade deficit of the European Union (EU) widened beyond 2009 levels, despite Germanys US200 billion trade surplus, even though the overall EU deficit was smaller than in 2008. Japan was an exception to the overall trend towards smaller imbalances, as its trade surplus nearly quadrupled in 2010 compared to pre-crisis levels. 11 There is widespread consensus that current imbalances are not sustainable in the long term. Persistently high levels of debt-financed household consumption in the US will have to return to slightly lower historical levels (Mayer, 2011). At the same time, low consumption rates and high national savings in China have prompted calls for Beijing to develop its internal market and gradually move from investment and export to consumer-led growth. These trends are likely to affect both the size and composition of global demand in years ahead. This is partly because increased Chinese consumption might not fully compensate a possible decrease in US demand growth, but also because the two economies tend to import different baskets of goods, with China buying more raw material, commodities and food, for example. Unless other trade surplus countries such as Germany or Japan also enhance their domestic consumption, changes in global demand will have major negative repercussions on developing country exports, and also on employment particularly in manufacturing sectors such as textiles and clothing (Mayer, 2011). Figure 9.2 Trade imbalances in selected economies, 200810 (in US million) Source: WTO (2011b). 12 SouthSouth trade has also continued to expand, and now represents roughly 50 per cent of developing country exports. Africas trade volumes with its emerging partners have doubled in nominal value over the decade and now amount to 37 per cent of the continents total trade (AFDB et al. 2011). While China represents Africas leading emerging partner, having surpassed the US in volume terms, the sum of the continents trade with its other emerging partners (such as Turkey, Brazil, Korea and India) is now even larger than its trade with China. While these developments provide new opportunities export markets, technology transfer, aid and other forms of cooperation African exports to other developing countries largely remain concentrated on primary products, with little evidence to date that SouthSouth trade has prompted real structural transformation. Figure 9.3 Importsexports: US and China, 200511 (in US million) 13 Figure 9.4 Importsexports: Germany and the EU, 200511 (in US million) Source: WTO (2011b). 14 Since January 2010, the Doha Round has continued to flounder, with deadlines for concluding the ten-year talks being missed at the end of that year and the next, and now having no end in sight. Over the course of the year, the US repeatedly called for mandatory participation in sectoral agreements for manufactured products, due to slash tariffs across an entire industry. Brazil, China and India rejected US demands for major emerging economies to take on particular responsibilities, and disputed Washingtons claim that the December 2008 draft texts disproportionately penalise the US calling instead on the US to clarify what specific concessions Washington might offer in return for increased market access. 15 Meanwhile, the G-33 group of developing countries made a series of proposals in favour of a strong special safeguard mechanism that they could use to defend domestic agricultural producers from sudden import surges or price depressions. The US and other exporting countries continued to insist that developing country flexibilities should not undermine growth in normal trade. 16 After a much-touted but ultimately fruitless stocktaking exercise in March 2010, members met for most of the remaining year in various informal bilateral and plurilateral groups described as variable geometry by WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy. Trade also featured in discussions on the sidelines of gatherings of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and on the agenda of the Toronto and Seoul summits of the G-20 group of leading economies only for officials to find that the interests of major trading powers were still not close enough for a Doha deal to be struck in the near future. In early 2011, Mexico and Brazil tabled separate proposals on breaking the Doha deadlock, including possible trade-offs between separate negotiating areas such as agriculture and manufactured goods: however, these found little support at the global trade body. Recognising that gaps were increasingly hard to bridge, trade negotiators began discussing options for a soft landing. The release of revised texts or working documents in April 2011 confirmed fears that progress had stymied, with some negotiating group chairs only able to release state of play reports instead of new drafts. 17 Members then began quiet discussions on what a Plan B might look like. The plan was officially announced in May: members would finalise a mini-package focused on concerns of least developed countries (LDCs) for the December Ministerial, and also establish a work plan to resolve other outstanding issues. At the insistence of the US, the package was broadened to include non-LDC issues too. However, the package quickly began to unravel as members became unable to agree on which LDC and non-LDC items to include. Consensus proved elusive on the four main issues that LDCs sought to include: duty-free quota-free access for their exports an LDC services waiver, a step forward on cotton, and improved rules of origin. Similarly, trading powers were unable to agree on the growing number of non-LDC issues proposed, which ranged from fishery subsidies to trade facilitation and export competition. 18 By August, the plan for the December 2011 Ministerial had shifted away from producing an LDC-plus package: members instead decided they would focus on non-Doha issues and on a post-December work plan for concluding Doha, while holding parallel discussions on possible LDC deliverables. 19 Several factors explain members inability to conclude the trade talks. Some point to the fact that the negotiating process has become too politicised and complex, given the growing diversity and varied expectations of the WTOs 153-country membership. Others blame the rise of emerging economies such as Brazil, China and India, together with more assertive developing country coalitions. Others still link it to the global financial crisis and recent domestic difficulties in the EU and the US which have prevented those countries from fully exercising a leadership role in WTO negotiations. Finally, countries positions and negotiating interests have changed over time reflecting nowadays geopolitical dynamics. All these factors are relevant, but critics are increasingly pointing to a more fundamental flaw in the system, which relates to the way in which negotiations are conducted. Some observers have therefore argued that thorough reform of the system is needed to overcome the current paralysis. 20 Others remark that it is not necessarily the WTOs institutional procedures that have paralysed the organisation, but rather the way in which members have chosen to use its rules and practices (Rodriguez Mendoza and Wilke, 2011 Rolland, 2010). In fact some experts argue that the WTO has served as a model governance system at the international level, predominantly because of its automatic and enforceable dispute settlement system. Moreover, through its set of rules and disciplines, it is argued, the WTO has also been successful in preventing protectionist tendencies during economic crisis. 1 The Warwick Report . for example, provides one of the most notable and comprehensive stock-taking e (. ) 21 Nonetheless debate over institutional reform whether it is needed, in what form and via what kind of process has continued ever since the WTO was first established (Deere-Birbeck and Monagle, 2009). In 2003, after the failure of the Cancn Ministerial Conference, Pascal Lamy then EU trade commissioner qualified the WTO as medieval and called for its decision-making process to be revamped (Lamy, 2003). In recent years, various actors have proposed reforming virtually every aspect of the WTOs functioning from management and administration through the conduct of trade negotiations and dispute settlement, to capacity-building and cooperation with other institutions or the public at large (Deere-Birbeck and Monagle, 2009). The objectives behind those proposals and the pace of proposed reforms have been equally diverse, going from incremental improvements to radical changes in the way the institution functions. While some proposals have been introduced by governments, others have been put forward by academia, research institutes, civil society and other international organisations.1 The multilateral system itself has not been static in the face of these demands. Reforms or incremental changes have happened on a number of fronts, including at the management level, in external transparency, public participation in dispute settlement proceedings or in the way in which negotiations are conducted (Deere-Birbeck and Monagle, 2009). There are, however, diverging views on the desirability and impact of these changes and on whether they go far enough. 2 When governments launched the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations under the GATT in 1986, the decl (. ) 22 The debate sparked renewed interest as members prepared for the November 2009 Ministerial. After ten years of complex negotiations, characterised by missed deadlines and few substantive dividends, critics have argued that the bodys established rules, principles and practices of decision-making, carried over from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),2 are simply ill-suited to the fast changing challenges of our times. Some even argue that the GATTWTOs golden triangle of decision-making the dominance of contracting parties, the consensus principle and the logic of the single undertaking is unable to meet the challenges of modern global trade governance (Cottier and Elsig, 2009). 23 Strengthening the WTOs negotiation functioning will require balancing three competing demands: greater efficiency in the conduct of negotiations enhanced legitimacy including by better addressing public policy concerns and greater inclusiveness, so as to overcome power asymmetries and foster mutually beneficial outcomes. The following sections review some of the criticism and the proposed reform options for the WTOs conduct of negotiations in light of these objectives. 3 The consensus principle dates back to the International Trade Organization (ITO) and with it the e (. ) 4 With the exception of the improvements and clarifications of the DSU, the conduct, conclusion and (. ) 24 WTO negotiations are guided by the consensus principle and by the idea that they represent a single undertaking . Consensus is not interpreted as requiring unanimity however,3 if no present member state objects, consensus is assumed. The single undertaking, on the other hand, requires that all areas are negotiated and adopted by all parties at the same time .4 Both principles derive directly from the WTOs nature as a member-driven organisation. With the secretariat assuming an almost marginal role and the consensus principle on the basis of sovereign equality permeating all areas and functions of the organisation, the dominance of contracting parties is its main characteristic. 25 Each concept can be seen as a double-edged sword. The consensus principle is important for developing countries as, in theory, it guarantees that every member can veto any decisions, irrespective of its political or economic power. The single undertaking, on the other hand, has supported developing countries on numerous occasions, for instance when a group of Latin American members halted the establishment of the WTO until certain concessions of vital interest to developing countries had been made (Croome, 1995). 26 Both pillars nonetheless need to be seen in the context of the overarching power asymmetries at the WTO. In practice, wealthier nations can hold trade talks hostage more easily than poorer ones, because of the fact that they are better able to withstand political pressure to join a consensus even against great opposition (Steinberg, 2002 Cottier and Elsig, 2009 Low, 2009). The consensus principle is thus less about the actual consensual adoption of a final decision than about the process of consensus-building (Ismail and Vickers, 2011). The largest trading nations therefore bear particular responsibility for helping countries to reach agreement by guiding the process of consensus-building and facilitating an atmosphere of compromise. Ismail and Vickers thus note that, in the Doha round, developed countries also share considerable blame even responsibility for frustrating the process of consensus-building. It is disturbing that critics of the consensus principle raise efficiency concerns only when smaller developing countries and larger emerging economies (e. g. Brazil, China, India and South Africa) do not join the consensus of the developed countries (Ismail and Vickers, 2011). 27 This is similarly true for the single undertaking and the use of linkages to condition concessions in one area to progress in others. While in principle these could foster compromises by focusing negotiators attention on the greatest gains, in practice members tend to overemphasise the losses (Van Grasstek and Sauv, 2006). This is particularly true for the current round, where negotiators do not seek to establish linkages systematically with a view to achieving long-term benefits, but focus instead on achieving short-term gains for tactical reasons (Rodriguez Mendoza and Wilke, 2011). The introduction of linkages prevents certain areas from moving ahead independent of progress in others. As a result, even small deals cannot be reached, as new proposals prompt further linkages. 28 Proposals to reform those two core negotiating principles (Deere-Birbeck and Monagle, 2009) can be summarised in two categories: those introducing different voting systems, and those relating to variable geometry agreements including so-called plurilateral and critical mass agreements. 5 Note that weighted voting at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is based on (. ) 29 Proposals on weighted voting (one suggestion for reforming the consensus principle) and critical mass agreements share a common idea. Power be it for voting, agenda setting or participation in negotiations would reflect a countrys economic significance. The allocation of votes could thus reflect a countrys share in global trade, GDP or the level of market openness. Some experts also suggest taking into account country size or population, arguing that this would ensure power is shared fairly among developed, emerging and other developing countries (Cottier and Takenoshita, 2008 Elsig, 2009). However, experience with weighted voting approaches in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank show that the approach can easily manifest real power asymmetries rather than overcoming imbalances (Warwick Commission, 2007).5 30 The current voting system does not suffer from a large group of small countries blocking negotiations, but instead from a handful of powerful countries that are unable to reach agreement among themselves. The alternative, a simple majority vote, could be difficult to introduce as it would undermine the currently powerful position of developed countries by enabling groups of smaller countries to overrule them. Experience in the United Nations (UN) General Assembly indicates that many countries would systematically oppose the introduction of a simple majority vote (Anghie, 2005). 31 The concept of variable geometry agreements is an alternative to the single undertaking. Plurilateral agreements, for example, have already been used in the past. Here, the participation of all WTO members is not required in order to strike a deal and interested members are free to join the negotiation or not. Several experts have suggested reviving and enhancing this approach (Consultative Board, 2004 Elsig, 2008). The critical mass approach is slightly different in the sense that it requires that participating members represent at least a critical mass or a certain threshold of a sector under negotiation based on their collective level of economic activity, production, consumption or exports (Jackson, 2001). Supporters argue that the inclusion of import share in the threshold would ensure that critical mass agreements could not be misused by exporters to harmonise their export systems to the detriment of importers an issue they consider to be of increasing importance as, for instance, high-technology producing countries face shortages in needed raw materials that are extracted in only a handful of countries (ICTSD, 2011d). Proposed thresholds range from 75 to 90 per cent. Proponents argue that the threshold could further be coupled with the requirement to include at least a minimum number of countries. If constructed in a sensitive way, supporters suggest, this second requirement could ensure the legitimacy of a particular critical mass rather than only its efficiency. The Warwick Commission, for instance, notes that a positive global welfare benefit, to protect the principle of non-discrimination, and to accommodate explicitly the income distribution effects of rule-making would need to be part of a critical mass consideration, in particular when it relates to the formation of an agenda (Warwick Commission, 2007, 3). 32 It needs to be cautioned, however, that most of the proposals for a critical mass approach focus on negotiations on downstream modalities and concessions (basically market access), thus limiting thresholds to purely economic considerations. As the WTO moves towards addressing a greater array of trade-related policies, such a critical mass concept might be inappropriate. Small countries, for instance, may not have a particular export or import trade share in a certain sector and are thus not indispensable for a critical mass, yet they would be critically affected by any new rules be this on agriculture commodities or new regulation on services trade. This is particularly true as trends in rule-making increasingly serve as a reference for legal interpretation and new regulatory approaches are used as a reference and argument in non-related yet similar negotiations. Each negotiation is thus also about shaping global policy and law trends. 6 The agreements and associated legal instruments included in Annex 4 (hereinafter referred to as (. ) 33 Another aspect that continues to be disputed among the supporters of a critical mass approach is the most favoured nation (MFN) character of the final agreements. Current plurilateral WTO agreements (where no critical mass was required) only apply among the members that have signed them.6 If further strengthened, this approach has the potential to turn the WTO into an umbrella organisation facilitating group arrangements while losing its multilateral and thus participatory and inclusive character. To meet this concern, alternative proposals suggest extending the rights and benefits deriving from critical mass agreements on an MFN basis to all WTO members (Warwick Commission, 2007). This could preserve the multilateral character of the WTO and thus its integrity while supporting fast-track negotiations. 34 However, even the latter construct raises certain questions. First, assumin g that a given sector was irrelevant for a particular country at the time when a critical mass negotiation was concluded, it remains unclear how the country could be induced to join the agreement if the benefits already apply on an MFN basis. Also, it is unclear whether a country would be required to join the existing agreement or whether there would be an option to renegotiate the terms (Harbinson, 2009). If no changes were allowed, powerful groups could now conclude agreements that become relevant for developing countries only at a later stage, thus indirectly imposing their terms and conditions. Criticisms regarding a trend towards WTO-plus commitments in FTAs and the fear over the Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA) introducing a new global benchmark for the protection of intellectual property come to mind in this respect (ICTSD, 2008b). 35 While some of the proposals discussed above might be promising, neither a review of the voting procedures nor a critical mass approach in isolation of other reforms seem to have the potential to fully achieve the three objectives of WTO reform, namely, efficiency, legitimacy and inclusiveness. Instead, if implemented in their simplest form, both concepts risk excluding smaller countries and exacerbating power asymmetries. Also, none of the proposed reforms would be likely to resolve the current deadlock in the Doha round which results, to a large extent, from political differences rather than weak procedural rules. In this respect, some critics have challenged the member-driven nature of the institution. They argue that a stronger WTO secretariat could be useful, particularly in times where members fail to initiate needed deliberations or where discussions are paralysed by individual member states political actions. If members are not prepared to defend and promote the principles they subscribed to, then the Secretariat must be free to do so, the Sutherland report noted already in 2004 (Consultative Board, 2004). 7 See for instance the 2003 Memorandum on the Need to Improve Internal Transparency and Participati (. ) 36 Such proposals, however, need to be seen in the light of already existing criticism over a too powerful and partial WTO secretariat. The same stakeholders fear that strengthening the secretariat could create a strong institution following its own internal agenda.7 Consequentially, the challenge would be a strong, yet neutral secretariat. Proponents agree that this could only be guaranteed if member states were to ensure a constant participation and oversight. Efforts on strengthening the secretariat would thus focus primarily on increased political support by member states rather than a budgetary increase or a mandate extension as advocated by others. The idea behind this is to redirect but not replace the preponderant role of member states, i. e. to strengthen the WTO through increased policy deliberation among its members. 8 For instance, during the 7th Ministerial Conference in 2009, the delegation of Uruguay called upon (. ) 37 One important starting point could be the election process of the Director General (Consultative Board, 2004 Steger, 2009). This process provides a critical opportunity to reflect on the most pressing challenges facing the organisation. If candidates were to take a strong position while countries provided them with clear indications on what is expected over the coming term, directors would receive a strong mandate to lead and guide even in critical times (Deere-Birbeck and Monagle, 2009, 74). The current practice of nodding through rather than electing a new Director General, without any internal and external reflection process, on the other hand, weakens the position of the Director General, the member states and the WTO as an institution (Keohane and Nye, 2000). A second point of entry could be the regular Ministerial Conferences. If members used the meetings to reflect on the standing of the WTO, the way forward and the actions expected in the coming years, the secretariat could guide the organisation accordingly over the coming months. In fact Ministerial Conferences were originally meant to provide for such a forum. Only with the launch of the Doha Round they have turned into pure negotiation gatherings. Numerous developing countries have consistently criticised this development.8 38 As described above, there has been no shortage of thoughtful ideas and recommendations from a variety of different sources and study groups. But some critics argue that these ideas have gone nowhere because they have had no process to feed into. Currently only one set of proposals is being discussed in a formalised manner at the WTO, namely those related to dispute settlement (WTO, 1999b). As foreseen by the original WTO agreements a special session of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) has been reviewing related reform proposals since 1997. Formally it proceeds outside of the Doha Round and is not part of the single undertaking. In practice, however, the review is used as a trade-off opportunity in the Doha Round which has prevented any conclusion over the last 14 years. To allow for a proper debate, other reform proposals will also need to be addressed in a formalised process at the WTO. Such a process would probably need to involve and engage trade ministers themselves to generate sufficient credibility and political traction. Ideally, the process should be co-chaired and co-owned by a developing and a developed country trade minister. 39 At the same time, the experience of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) review shows that any reform discussion must be de-linked from trade negotiations. Enforcing such an objective and non-concession-based discussion could be easier if various reform proposals were debated in a joint forum with a common objective and a single plan of action. Moreover, a joint process would facilitate the coordination of different reforms ensuring that the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the WTO do not develop in opposite directions but are mutually supportive. 40 A first opportunity to initiate such a process was missed at the 7th Ministerial Conference, in December 2009, essentially due to a lack of political will to push this agenda through. During the preparatory process and under the leadership of India, 18 developed and developing countries had proposed to address the need for an institutional reform in a formalised and long-term manner. The coalition, backed by almost the entire WTO membership, called upon the WTO to periodically engage in a process of review of its functioning, efficiency and transparency and upon the member states to consider systemic improvements, as appropriate. to establish an appropriate deliberative process to review the organizations functioning, efficiency and transparency and consider possible improvements, while bearing in mind the high priority attached to the successful conclusion of the DDA Doha Development Agenda negotiation (WTO, 2009). 41 However, the proposal was dropped from consideration following opposition from Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela ( ICTSD. 2009). An earlier communication submitted by India in summer 2009, entitled Strengthening the WTO, likewise remained without further consideration ( Deere-Birbeck, 2009). These missed opportunities further aggravate the dilemma of the WTO as political guidance becomes hampered at the very first stage ( Deere-Birbeck, 2009). If the secretariat assumed a more active role in preparing ministerial conferences and guiding towards processes as those called upon by the country coalition, initial opposition might be overcome. As a formal forum for discussing reform proposals continues to be missing, this could be the first step towards reform. 42 Beyond institutional reform, the current paralysis in the Doha Round is affecting the ability of the system to address pressing global challenges. Over the last 17 years, public perceptions of the organisations relevance and legitimacy have greatly depended on the degree to which it can credibly claim to be responding effectively to broader public policy demands in areas such as food security, environmental protection, labour standards and, more recently, the transition towards a low-carbon economy. However, the difficulty the WTO has experienced in bringing its troubled Doha Round talks to a successful conclusion is arguably hampering its ability to respond and adapt meaningfully to new public policy challenges. 43 From its inception in 1994 as an organisation outside the UN system, the WTO has consistently been obliged to demonstrate that its decision-making processes, rules and negotiating outcomes are consistent with broader public policy goals in the areas of health, the environment or development, to name but a few. While calls for greater policy coherence have often come from the governments that constitute the membership of the global trade body, they have also come from civil society groups, the media and even from other intergovernmental agencies concerned with the relationship between trade and public policy objectives. 9 Policies directed at ensuring food security certainly reach beyond the trade arena. Investment in (. ) 44 The evolution in the way in which food security concerns are addressed at the WTO can serve to illustrate the organisations attempt to take wider public policy goals into account.9 It also demonstrates the challenges that remain in establishing policy coherence with other global governance mechanisms, and in responding to the scale and ambition of the aspirations and commitments that governments have agreed to in the post-war period (United Nations General Assembly, 1948, art. 25 1 966, art. 11 2000, goal 1) (FAO, 1996, para. 2). 45 At the global level, evolving consumption patterns, combined with demographic changes, urbanisation and low agricultural productivity growth, are widely expected to mean that regional and international trade will play an increased role in many developing countries food security strategies. Combined with increased investment in agriculture, international trade mighthelp offset future climate-induced production decreases in certain regions, ensuring that local populations can purchase food that may be unavailable in sufficient quantities through domestic production. 10 Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficie (. ) 46 Two years before the 1996 World Food Summit agreed on a landmark definition10 of food security that is still widely used and accepted today, the concept was mentioned in the preamble to the Agreement on Agriculture at the end of the Uruguay Round, and in some paragraphs within the text of the accord. These included provisions dealing with export prohibitions and restrictions (article 12), subsidies for public stockholding for food security purposes (Annex 2, para. 3) and a clause permitting exemptions to be made from market access binding and reduction commitments (Annex 5, para. 1d). However, while food security is also related to numerous other aspects of the agreement, such as subsidy reform or market access considerations, it is not explicitly mentioned anywhere else in the text. 11 See, for example, proposals from the developing country Like Minded Group (23 June 2000), GAGN (. ) 47 As governments concluded the Agreement on Agriculture, they also finalised the Marrakech Decision (WTO, 1999c) on least developed and net-food importing developing countries, supposedly intended to ensure that these countries would remain able to purchase food from external sources on reasonable terms and conditions. The decision has since been widely criticised by developing countries, who have argued that loopholes in the text prevent them from requiring developed countries and the international financial institutions to implement its provisions.11 Essentially, the decision characterises the challenge that net food-importing countries could face as a trade and balance-of-payments problem rather than a food security problem, and provides a fairly limited set of solutions centring mainly on the provision of food aid. 48 Arguably, the way in which food security concerns have been approached in the multilateral trading system has evolved considerably since the end of the Uruguay Round, along with the way in which other public policy goals have been treated. In the years running up to the 2001 Doha ministerial conference, developing country governments expressed growing concern that they were ill-equipped to implement the Uruguay Round agreements, that the provisions of these agreements undermined domestic food security, or as in the case of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) that they had signed on to texts which affected their food security without fully understanding the practical and legal implications that might result. In some cases, these concerns were also echoed by development agencies and campaign groups, farmers organisations, research centres, academic experts and the staff of various intergovernmental organisations. 12 Cuba, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Pakistan, Haiti, Nicaragua, Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka (. ) 13 India (15 January 2001), GAGNGW102, wto. orgenglishtratopeagricenegsbkgrnd02p (. ) 14 Domestic support measures that are exempt from reduction commitments on the basis that they cause (. ) 49 In the summer following the WTOs Seattle ministerial conference in 1999, a cross-regional group of 11 developing countries known as the Like-Minded Group submitted a proposal12 for a development box, under the built-in agenda of negotiations foreseen in article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture. The sponsors called for a development box that would aim to increase food security and food accessibility by allowing developing countries to select which products would be disciplined under the rules of the Agreement on Agriculture allowing developing countries to re-evaluate and adjust their tariff levels provide greater flexibility for developing countries to use limited amounts of trade-distorting support under the de minimis provision (WTO, 1999a, art. 6.4) and allowing developing countries to use the special safeguard clause. Measures to reform developed country subsidies and tariffs were also included as part of the same proposal. The Indian government echoed many of these proposals in an early 2001 submission13 calling for the establishment of a food security box, which also contemplated measures to reform rules on green box subsidies.14 Several of the elements outlined in the development box proposal were later to appear, in modified form, in subsequent negotiating submissions and texts. 50 The Doha declaration launching a new round of trade talks dubbed the Doha Development Agenda by the WTO also made explicit reference to food security goals. It stated that developing countries would be accorded special and differential treatment so as to enable them to take account effectively of their development needs, including food security and rural development (WTO, 2001, para. 13). Such treatment was to be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations, the declaration said, in language that was to be echoed in a large number of negotiating proposals submitted in the years that were to follow. 15 Substantial improvements in market access reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms o (. ) 51 The dozens of proposals that invoked food security during the Doha Round, and in the years immediately before its launch, can be roughly divided into a handful of broad, non-exhaustive categories, largely reflecting the emphasis of the agriculture negotiations on four main areas15 : 52 On market access, many developing countries sought to be granted greater flexibility on tariff commitments, and access to an agricultural safeguard that would allow themselves to shield producers from the effects of import surges or price depressions. 16 A provision allowing developing countries to exempt some input and investment subsidies from reduc (. ) 53 Food security concerns were discussed in relation to trade-distorting support in general, but were also given particular attention in proposals for reform of the WTOs green box, and for maintaining or expanding article 6.2 of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture.16 54 The issue of food security also arose in negotiations on proposed new disciplines governing the provision of food aid, and in debates on export credits and other export competition issues. 55 Finally, importing countries in particular raised questions and concerns over food security in proposals on export restrictions (including export taxes and export prohibitions). 56 In each of these areas, different political constituencies and country grouping were active in seeking concessions. 17 See, for example, G-33 proposals: 1 June 2004 (JOB(04)65) 3 June 2005 (JOB(05)91) 12 Oct 2005 (. ) 57 On special products and the special safeguard mechanism, a group of import-sensitive developing countries that came to be known as the G-33 argued in favour of greater flexibility on market access disciplines, on the basis that this was needed to safeguard the livelihoods, food security and longer-term development of their rural populations, including large numbers of small-scale producers that would be ill-equipped to compete with industrialised (and often also subsidised) agriculture elsewhere in the world.17 Analysis by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and the South Centre including country level studies helped contribute to the evolution of countries negotiating positions on these issues (Mably, 2007 Wolfe, 2009 ICTSDFAO, 2007 Matthews, 2011). 18 See, for example, various exporting country proposals: 2 May 2006 (JOB(06)135) 3 May 2006 (JOB(0 (. ) 58 The G-33 proposed allowing developing countries to designate a limited set of products as special based on objective indicators of food security, livelihood security and rural development. Such indicators included, for example, the share of local income spent on a particular product, employment by product, productivity levels, rates of self-sufficiency, or the contribution of a product to local nutrition. Based on this country-specific analysis the tariffs of the selected products would then qualify for gentler reduction under the Doha Round, or would even be exempt from any cuts. The G-33, however, encountered opposition to their proposals from developed countries seeking greater access to developing country markets, such as the US, but also from exporting developing countries, such as Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay.18 Controversy over the special safeguard mechanism played a s ignificant role in the breakdown of talks in July 2008 (ICTSD, 2008a). 59 Despite the disagreements in this area, the debate over special products in particular probably represents the most sophisticated attempt at defining food and livelihood security concerns in the WTO and how they relate to international trade. It is also symptomatic of how the discussion evolved over time in the trade body from a fairly narrow understanding of food security to a highly complex and differentiated approach based on indicators. 19 See African Group proposal, 20 Nov 2007 (JOB(02)187). 60 Food security concerns were also given particular attention in the review of the criteria for green box subsidies, as well as in the negotiations on domestic support more generally. The African Group (a group of developing countries that seeks reform of developed country agriculture), along with the G-20, has sought to expand the flexibility that the green box allows developing countries in being able to use domestic support to pursue national development goals.19 Among other things, these proposals would involve modifying the language on support for public stockholding for food security purposes so as to remove the existing requirement that developing countries count purchases from low-income or resource-poor producers towards their aggregate measure of support (AMS) an upper ceiling which would be reduced as part of the Doha Round negotiations. 61 In addition to proposals favouring greater flexibility for developing countries to subsidise their own agriculture sectors, two other main trends can be identified in the discussions on green box reform and in the debate over domestic support more generally (Hepburn and Bellmann, 2009). The first of these is the concern expressed by the G-2020 and by efficient agricultural exporters in the Cairns Group, which have argued that trade-distorting support undermines competitiveness and food security in countries that do not subsidise their agricultural sectors.21 These countries have also argued that green box programmes may be causing more than minimal trade distortion, and called for the criteria for these payments to be tightened.22 The other major trend is characterised by the proposals of countries with highly protected and heavily subsidised agricultural sectors, which have resisted such demands. These countries which include Japan23 and others in the G-10 coalition, as well as, to a lesser extent, the EU24 have instead historically called for greater flexibility to allow WTO members to address non-trade concerns, including food security. 25 See WTO (2005), para. 6. The text further specifies:On food aid, we reconfirm our commitment to m (. ) 26 6 March 2006 (TNAGGEN13). 27 25 Apr 2006 (JOB(06)122). 28 7 Apr 2006 (JOB(06)78). 62 Food security was also debated extensively in the negotiations over new rules on food aid. In exchange for agreeing, at the WTOs Hong Kong Ministerial in 2005, to the elimination of export subsidies, the EU had pressed trading partners to adopt disciplines on all export measures with equivalent effect including food aid.25 At the heart of the debate was the notion that in-kind food aid or practices such as monetisation have sometimes disrupted local food markets and affected local producers. While members agreed that a safe box would cover bona fide emergency situations, they also agreed to introduce rules that would prevent aid from undermining local producers in non-emergency situations. A proposal from the African and LDC groups26 formed the basis for negotiations, with further contributions from the European Community27 and the US28 the worlds major provider of in-kind food aid (ICTSD, 2006). 29 Cairns Group, 21 Dec 2000 (GAGNGW93) Japan, 15 Nov 2002 (JOB(02)164) Mauritius, 19 Nov 2002 (. ) 63 While the impact of export restrictions on food security has been a concern of various WTO members since the start of the Doha Round,29 debate and controversy over this issue has recently intensified, as two episodes of unusually high food prices and predictions of a long-term upward price trend for agricultural products increase the pressure on food importing countries, especially in the developing world (ICTSD, 2010, 2011b, c). While net-food-importing countries have drawn on analysis (FAO et al. 2011) by FAO staff and other experts to argue that export restrictions endanger food security by exacerbating shortages and volatility on world markets, exporting countries have thus far resisted any attempts to introduce more systemic disciplines in this area that go beyond the relatively limited disciplines set out in the Agreement on Agriculture or contemplated in the latest draft Doha agriculture accord. In part, this may be because of the role such measures play in supporting a strategy of enhancing value-addition in the exporting countries agriculture sector, and partly because of concerns that they could serve a useful role in responding to potential domestic food shortages. However, possibly more important is a more generalised reluctance on the part of exporting countries to make concessions in the absence of more far-reaching disciplines on trade distortions on the import side. 64 Despite the post-2008 stalemate in the WTOs Doha process, the same price trends and projections have helped to push food security back towards the top of the agenda in a number of political and policy-making processes, with the role of trade receiving some attention in this context. A series of high-level meetings the G-8s meeting in LAquila in 2008, the FAOs World Summit on Food Security in 2009 and the G-20 gathering of agriculture ministers in 2011 reflected the increased political importance being accorded to the question. However, while heads of state and ministers reaffirmed the importance of access to markets and pledged their commitment to raise agricultural productivity by boosting aid and investment, the WTO continues to be seen as the sole forum where concrete market access and subsidy commitments can be made. Even where agreement on trade-related measures has been reached, such as the G-20s June 2011 accord on exempting humanitarian food purchases from export restrictions, governments have recommended that further action be taken at the WTO (ICTSD, 2011a). Other trade-related issues such as biofuel subsidies have proven to be too controversial to be addressed meaningfully by the G-8 or G-20 (Tangermann, 2011), leaving their food security implications unresolved for the time being. 65 The establishment of the UNs High Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis , the elaboration of its Comprehensive Framework of Action and the reform of the Committee on World Food Security (CWFS) were significant steps in the effort to improve global governance and enhance policy coherence in this area. The WTO, FAO and eight other relevant bodies also collaborated around the inter-agency report to the G-20 in the first half of 2011 (FAO et al. 2011). However, much more could still be done in this regard. Recent suggestions have included ensuring that the WTO Committee on Agriculture takes a more active role in reviewing food security issues related to trade, and strengthening the collaboration between the CWFS, the WTO, the World Bank and the Rome-based institutions (Ahmad, 2011). Reforming and improving the international governance framework is a necessary step towards overcoming current shortcomings on trade and food security, even though by itself it will not be sufficient to do so. 66 Measures to enhance policy coherence and to reform governance structures at the international level will, however, need to be accompanied by similar moves at the domestic level, especially in key countries. The disconnect between governance mechanisms responsible for development and aid, for the environment and for agricultural policy can mean that, for example, EU or US policies on farm subsidies may be at odds with policies pursued on related issues such as climate or poverty. Furthermore, to a great extent, the geopolitical tensions between countries and blocs that have thwarted progress on international trade issues are mirrored by similar tensions on climate change, food security and development issues more generally. Behind these lie configurations of domestic interests and political constituencies at the national and sub-national level. The shifting global economic landscape of the last decade has thrown up new opportunities and threats for different actors, in developed countries as well as in the so-called emerging countries of the developing world, and created new challenges for the worlds poorest people whether they live in the group of countries that the UN officially recognises as LDCs, or elsewhere. 67 Even among trade negotiators, there is a growing awareness that the multilateral trading system is proving increasingly incapable of demonstrating that it is flexible and adaptable enough to prove its relevance in a changing world. At the same time, negotiators are reluctant to abandon the investment that has been made in elaborating a package of farm trade disciplines that are perceived to go some way towards restructuring an agricultural trading system that has been heavily criticised for failing to deliver on a range of global public policy goals, including food security. Any decision to abandon the Doha talks, or place them in deep freeze, would arguably leave a large Doha-shaped hole: current patterns of trade-distorting support and tariff protection would remain unchanged, in addition to the new trade and food security challenges that are emerging. Until countries are able to resolve the growing contradictions between domestic policies on trade, food security, climate and international development, there is little prospect of achieving greater policy coherence in these areas at the global level. 68 The WTO is not what it used to be a decade or so ago. Many new developing countries have since joined, and shifts in the balance of global economic and political power have transformed the playing field. Accordingly, new needs and different expectations have emerged, including demands on the decision-making processes, and their fairness and transparency. As described above, modern global trade governance requires a careful balance between greater efficiency, legitimacy and inclusiveness. These objectives are not incompatible, but would require WTO members to move from essentially promoting their individual short-term mercantilist interests to developing a shared vision to effectively advance global public policy goals. Numerous proposals have been put forward to strengthen the multilateral trading system. But as for any intergovernmental institution, change must come, and be agreed to, from the inside. This calls for the establishment of an inclusive and bottom-up process, one that seeks input from all WTO members, as well as seeking submissions from the different actors in the international trade community. Only with such a process will ideas have a realistic chance to be considered, and be transformed into agents for strengthening the system. 69 Years of near-exclusive focus on the Doha Round have inhibited institutional evolution and even diminished some of the WTOs permanent, non-negotiating functions such as the work of the regular committees. Beyond the WTO negotiating function, there might be therefore merit in strengthening the work of the regular WTO committees. In the run-up to the 2009 Ministerial Conference, several such proposals were put on the table, notably by India.30 These covered a variety of issues such as the need to enhance the WTO trade information system by including data on non-tariff barriers monitor developments in regional trade agreements (RTAs) and develop non-binding best practice guidelines for negotiating new RTAs establish an omnibus legal system that would address all forms of preferential market access for LDCs in a coherent way address the increasing role of standards and standard-setting bodies in international trade. Many of these proposals are still relevant today. 70 Finally, in parallel with efforts to revive the Doha Round, members could undertake work on a number of pressing global challenges. These could include concerns around the trade dimension of food security, food prices and export restrictions the potential trade impacts of emerging domestic policies designed to combat climate change or highly controversial matters around exchange rate policies and current trade imbalances. This is not to say that the WTO should become the sole or even primary body to deal with these matters. Several other institutions such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), FAO or IMF have indeed a major role to play in this area. The WTO, as the main organisation dealing with trade rules, should nevertheless contribute to addressing them insofar as they are linked to trade. Willingness to do so has already been expressed by a wide and cross-cutting segment of the WTO membership, but as a first step it might be more realistic to address these issues in a non-negotiating setting. In doing so, members could assess whether the WTO rule book is properly equipped to deal with emerging challenges or whether existing disciplines need to be clarified or amended. Existing institutional structures such as the Committee on Agriculture could be used for such an exercise. Precedents for doing so already exist. Singapore, for example, has recently made a submission to the regular session of the Committee on Trade and Environment to embark on work examining possible trade applications of border tax adjustment as a way to address competitiveness and carbon leakage concerns in climate change. Such an approach would enable the system to address challenges of the twenty-first century and prepare the ground for future negotiations when the political situation is ripe. Bibliography AFDB (African Development Bank), OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), UNECA (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa) (2011) African Economic Outlook 2011 (Paris: OECD). Ahmad, M. (2011) Improving the International Governance of Food Security and Trade (Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development). Anghie, A. (2005) Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Consultative Board to the Director-General (2004) The Future of the WTO: Addressing Institutional Changes in the New Millennium (Geneva: World Trade Organization). Cottier, T. and M. Elsig (2009) Reforming the WTO: The Decisions-Making Triangle Re-Addressed . paper presented at the World Trade Forum, World Trade Institute, University of Bern. Cottier, T. and S. Takenoshita (2008) Decisions-Making and the Balance of Powers in WTO Negotiations: Towards Supplementary Weighted Voting, in Griller, S. (ed.) At the Crossroads: The World Trading System and the Doha Round (Vienna: Springer). Croome, J. (1995) Reshaping the World Trading System (Geneva: World Trade Organisation WTO). Deere-Birbeck, C. (2009) Momentum Builds for Discussion of Reform at WTO Ministerial Conference . Global Economic Governance Programmes blog, 20 November, globaleconomicgovernance. orgblog200911momentum-builds-for-discussion-on-wto-reform-at-wto-ministerial-conference (accessed on 27 September 2011). Deere-Birbeck, C. and C. Monagle (2009) Strengthening Multilateralism: A Mapping of Selected Proposals on WTO Reform and Improvements in Global Trade Governance . discussion draft (GenevaOxford: ICTSD and Global Economic Governance Programme). Elsig, M. (2008) The World Trade Organization at Work: Performance in a Member-Driven Milieu . paper presented at the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, New York, 1518 February. Elsig, M. (2009) WTO Decisions-Making: Can We Get a Little Help from the Secretariat and the Critical Mass, in Steger, D. P. (ed.) Redesigning the World Trade Organization for the Twenty-first Century (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press). FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development), IMF (International Monetary Fund), OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development), WFP (World Food Programme), World Bank, WTO, IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) and the UN HLTF (High-Level Task Force) (2011) Price Volatility in Food and Agricultural Markets: Policy Responses (Rome: FAO), fao. orgfileadmintemplatesestVolatilityInteragencyReporttotheG20onFoodPriceVolatility. pdf (accessed on 27 September 2011). FAO (1996) Rome Declaration on Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action . W3613 (Rome: FAO). Harbinson, S. (2009) The Doha Round: Death-Defying Agenda or Dont Do it Again . ECIPE (European Centre for International Political Economy) Working Paper no. 10 (Brussels: ECIPE). Hepburn, J. and C. Bellmann (2009) Doha Round Negotiations on the Green Box and Beyond, in Melndez-Ortiz, R. C. Bellmann and J. Hepburn (eds.) Agricultural Subsidies in the WTO Green Box: Ensuring Coherence with Sustainable Development Goals (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Hufbauer, G. (2005) Inconsistencies Between Diagnosis and Treatment, Journal of International Economic Law ,8(2), pp. 2917. ICTSD (International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development) (2006) EU Food Aid Paper Proposes Strict Disciplines to Prevent Commercial Displacement, Bridges Weekly . 10(15), 3 May, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly7394 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2008a) Agricultural Safeguard Controversy Triggers Breakdown in Doha Round Talks, Bridges Weekly . 12(27), 7 August, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly18034 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD ( 2008b) Concern Grows over New IP Agreement, Bridges Monthly . 12(5), November, ictsd. orgdownloadsbridgesbridges12-5.pdf (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2009) WTO Ministerial Conference Opens in Geneva: Expect No Surprises . Bridges Daily Update, 30 November, ictsd. orgiwtogenevadaily-updates-2009geneva-2009-bridges-daily-updates62462 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2010) Under Threat of Higher Food Prices, WTO Members Debate Export Restrictions, Subsidies, Bridges Weekly . 14(41), 24 November, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly96974 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2011a) G-20 Agriculture Ministers Unveil Plan to Tackle High Food Prices, Bridges Weekly . 15(24), 29 June, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly109720 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2011b) OECD, FAO: No End for High Food Prices in Upcoming Decade, Bridges Weekly . 15(23), 22 June, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly109150 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD (2011c) Agricultural Export Restrictions Spark Controversy at the WTO, Bridges Weekly . 15(12), 6 April, ictsd. orginewsbridgesweekly103579 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSD ( 2011d) Tensions Build over Chinese Rare Earth Quotas, Bridges Trade BioRes . 11(16), 25 July, ictsd. orginewsbiores111203 (accessed on 27 September 2011). ICTSDFAO (2007) Indicators for the Selection of Agricultural Special Products: Some Empirical Evidence (Geneva: ICTSD). Ismail, F. and B. Vickers (2011) Towards Fair and Inclusive Decision-Making in WTO Negotiations, in Deere-Birbeck, C. (ed.) Making Global Trade Governance Work for Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Jackson, J. (2001) The WTO Constitution and Proposed Reforms: Seven Mantras Revisited, Journal of International Economic Law . 4(1), pp. 6778. Keohane, R. and J. Nye (2000) Between Centralization and Fragmentation: The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and Problems of Democratic Legitimacy . paper presented at the American Political Science Convention, Washington, DC, 31 August3 September. Lamy, P. (2003) After Cancun . Statements by Pascal Lamy, EU Trade Commissioner, at the Press Conference Closing the 5th WTO Ministerial Conference in Cancun on, 14 September. eurunion. orgnewspress20032003057.htm (accessed on 27 September 2011). Low, P. (2009) WTO Decision Making for the Future . paper presented at Thinking Ahead on International Trade (TAIT) Inaugural Conference, Geneva, 1718 September. Mably, P. (2007) The Role of Research on Trade Policy Changes Affecting the Developing World: Group of 33 Influence at the World Trade Organization . Latin American Trade Network Working Paper no. 77 (Buenos Aires: Latin American School of Social Sciences), latn. org. arwebwp-contentuploads201006wp-77-Mably. pdf (accessed on 27 September 2011). Matthews, A. (2011) The Impact of WTO Agricultural Trade Rules on Food Security and Development: An Examination of Proposed Additional Flexibilities for Developing Countries . IIIS (Institute for International Integration Studies) Discussion Paper no. 371 (Dublin: IIIS, Trinity College), tcd. ieiiisdocumentsdiscussionpdfsiiisdp371.pdf (accessed on 27 September 2011). Mayer, J. (2011) Structural Change, Global Imbalances, and Employment in the Least Developed Countries . Policy Brief no. 1 (Geneva: ICTSD). Oxfam (2002) Rigged Rules and Double Standards. Trade, Globalisation and the Fight Against Poverty (BrusselsGenevaNew YorkWashington: Oxfam), maketradefairassetsenglishreportenglish. pdf (accessed on 27 September 2011). Pauwelyn, J. (2005) The Sutherland Report: A Missed Opportunity for Genuine Debate on Trade, Globalization and Reforming the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law . 8(2), pp. 32946. Rodriguez Mendoza, M. and M. Wilke (2011) Revisiting the Single Undertaking: Towards a More Balanced Approach to WTO Negotiations, in Deere-Birbeck C. (ed.) (2011) Making Global Trade Governance Work for Development (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Rolland, S. (2010) Redesigning the Negotiation Process at the WTO, Journal of International Economic Law . 13(65), pp. 65110. Steger, D. (ed.) (2009) Why Institutional Reform of the WTO is Necessary, in Redesigning the World Trade Organization (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press), pp. 311. Steinberg, R. (2002) In the Shadow of Law or Power Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes at the GATTWTO, International Organizations . 56(2), pp. 33974. UNCTAD (2011) World Investment Report 2011, Non-Equity Modes of International Production and Development (Geneva: UNCTAD). United Nations General Assembly (2000) United Nations Millennium Declaration . ARES552 (New York: United Nations). United Nations General Assembly (1948) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (New York: United Nations), un. orgendocumentsudhr (accessed on 27 September 2011). United Nations General Assembly (1966) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (New York: United Nations), www2.ohchr. orgenglishlawcescr. htm (accessed on 27 September 2011). Van Grasstek, C. and P. Sauv (2006) The Consistency of WTO Rules: Can the Single Undertaking be Squared with Variable Geometry, Journal of International Economic Law . 9(4), pp. 83764. Warwick Commission (2007) The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward (Coventry: Warwick University). Wolfe, R. (2009) The Special Safeguard Fiasco in the WTO: The Perils of Inadequate Analysis and Negotiation, World Trade Review . 8(4), pp. 51744. WTO (1999a) Agreement on Agriculture, in The Legal Texts: The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). WTO (1999b) Decision on the Application and Review of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, in The Legal Texts: The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Warwick Commission (2007) The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward (Coventry: The University of Warwick). WTO (1999c) Decision on Measures Concerning the Possible Negative Effects of the Reform Programme on Least-Developed and Net Food-Importing Developing Countries, in The Legal Texts: The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). WTO (1999d) Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, in The Legal Texts: The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). WTO (2001) Doha Ministerial Declaration . WTMIN(01)DEC1 (Doha: WTO). WTO (2005) Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration . WTMIN(05)DEC (Hong Kong: WTO). WTO (2009) Strengthening the WTO . WTMIN(09)W1, Communication from Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Hong Kong China, European Communities, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, United States and Uruguay (Geneva: WTO). WTO (2011a) World Trade Report 2011. The WTO and Preferential Trade Agreements: From Co-existence to Coherence (Geneva: WTO). WTO (2011b) Quarterly World Merchandise Trade by Region and Selected Economies (Geneva: WTO), wto. orgenglishresestatisequarterlyworldexpe. htm (accessed on 8 November 2011). 1 The Warwick Report . for example, provides one of the most notable and comprehensive stock-taking exercises produced by non-governmental experts (Warwick Commission, 2007). Another critical milestone in this debate was the report commissioned in 2003 by Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi, then Director General of the World Trade Organization (WTO), to a panel of experts chaired by the former Director General of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Peter Sutherland, on The Future of the WTO: Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millennium. Despite its comprehensive analysis and concrete recommendations, the Sutherland Report was, however, criticised as a defence of the status quo . produced by insiders, thus lacking novel approaches (Hufbauer, 2005 Pauwelyn, 2005). As such it did not provide the necessary impetus to initiate a structured discussion among members. 2 When governments launched the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations under the GATT in 1986, the declared aim was not to establish a standing global organisation on trade governance. What later became the WTO, only emerged over the last few months of the almost eight years lasting negotiations. When members realised that the trade package to be presented at the end of the negotiation round would include new areas such as intellectual property rights and services, the need arose to discuss processes and structures that would ensure the coherence of these different agreements. The decision to establish the WTO finally stemmed from that discussion and other related considerations in the negotiation Group on the Functioning of the GATT (FOGS). Since no systemic, long-term negotiations had taken place on a potential international organisation, most agreements (with the exception of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) which had been revised completely during the Uruguay Round) thus replicate the principles that have served that GATT for the last five decades. Moreover, when members launched the ongoing Doha Round they referred back to the negotiation principles used during the Uruguay Round, namely the principles of consensus and single undertaking. See Rodriguez Mendoza and Wilke (2011). 3 The consensus principle dates back to the International Trade Organization (ITO) and with it the early beginnings of the GATT. See Ismail and Vickers (2011). 4 With the exception of the improvements and clarifications of the DSU, the conduct, conclusion and entry into force of the outcome of the negotiations shall be treated as parts of a single undertaking. However, agreements reached at an early stage may be implemented on a provisional or a definitive basis. Early agreements shall be taken into account in assessing the overall balance of the negotiations (WTO, 2001, para. 47). 5 Note that weighted voting at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is based on the level of a countrys financial contribution to the organisations budget. Currently the United States holds roughly 17 per cent of the votes, with the G-7 holding a total of 45 per cent. WTO-related proposals certainly differ from this, yet there are important lessons to be learnt from the World Banks and IMFs experience with power-based voting. 6 The agreements and associated legal instruments included in Annex 4 (hereinafter referred to as Plurilateral Trade Agreements) are also part of this Agreement for those Members that have accepted them, and are binding on those Members. The Plurilateral Trade Agreements do not create either obligations or rights for Members that have not accepted them (WTO, 1999d, Article II:3). 7 See for instance the 2003 Memorandum on the Need to Improve Internal Transparency and Participation in the WTO by the Third World Network, Oxfam International, Public Services International, World Wildlife Fund International, The Center for International Environmental Law, Focus on the Global South, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, The Africa Trade Network, The International General and Trade Network, and the Tebtebba International Centre for Indigenous Peoples Rights, 13 July 2003. 8 For instance, during the 7th Ministerial Conference in 2009, the delegation of Uruguay called upon the WTO members to not confuse the Ministerial with various kinds of negotiation sessions. There would be no justification for continuing to postpone the regular revocation of the topmost body of the WTO, particularly in the current world economic and trade environment, which requires international cooperation, direct political involvement at the multilateral level, and strong credible institutions (WTO, 2009). 9 Policies directed at ensuring food security certainly reach beyond the trade arena. Investment in the agriculture sector, land rights and access to water and other natural resources are of equal importance in this context. However, the following discussion will be limited to the interface of the multilateral trading system and food security. 10 Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life(FAO, 1996). 11 See, for example, proposals from the developing country Like Minded Group (23 June 2000), GAGNGW13 Kenya (12 March 2001), GAGNGW136 and Small Island Developing States (29 December 2000), GAGNGW97, wto. orgenglishtratopeagricenegsbkgrnd02props1e. htm (accessed on 27 September 2011). 12 Cuba, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Pakistan, Haiti, Nicaragua, Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and El Salvador (23 June 2000), GAGNGW13, wto. orgenglishtratopeagricenegsbkgrnd02props1e. htm (accessed on 27 September 2011). 14 Domestic support measures that are exempt from reduction commitments on the basis that they cause not more than minimal distortion of trade or production, set out in Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture. 15 Substantial improvements in market access reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms of export subsidies and substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support (WTO, 2001, para. 13). 16 A provision allowing developing countries to exempt some input and investment subsidies from reduction commitments. 17 See, for example, G-33 proposals: 1 June 2004 (JOB(04)65) 3 June 2005 (JOB(05)91) 12 Oct 2005 (JOB(05)230) 22 Nov 2005 (JOB(05)304) 22 Nov 2005 (JOB(05)303) 11 May 2006 (JOB(06)143) 7 June 2006 (JOB(06)173) 16 June 2006 (JOB(06)189Rev.1) 28 Mar 2007 (JOB(07)35) 3 June 2008 (JOB(08)47) 28 Jan 2010 (TNAGGEN30). 18 See, for example, various exporting country proposals: 2 May 2006 (JOB(06)135) 3 May 2006 (JOB(06)137) 20 February 2008 (JOB(08)6) 8 April 2008 (JOB(08)24). 19 See African Group proposal, 20 Nov 2007 (JOB(02)187). 20 16 May 2006 (JOB(06)145). 21 Arguably, civil society organisations also played an important role in highlighting some of these connections. See, for example, Oxfam (2002). 22 See, for example, proposals dated 27 Sept 2002: Cairns Group (JOB(02)132) and Canada (JOB(02)131). 25 See WTO (2005), para. 6. The text further specifies:On food aid, we reconfirm our commitment to maintain an adequate level and to take into account the interests of food aid recipient countries. To this end, a safe box for bona fide food aid will be provided to ensure that there is no unintended impediment to dealing with emergency situations. Beyond that, we will ensure elimination of commercial displacement. To this end, we will agree effective disciplines on in-kind food aid, monetization and re-exports so that there can be no loop-hole for continuing export subsidization. 26 6 March 2006 (TNAGGEN13). 27 25 Apr 2006 (JOB(06)122). 28 7 Apr 2006 (JOB(06)78). 29 Cairns Group, 21 Dec 2000 (GAGNGW93) Japan, 15 Nov 2002 (JOB(02)164) Mauritius, 19 Nov 2002 (JOB(02)182) Cuba, 20 Jan 2003 (JOB(02)190Corr.1 Korea, 18 Dec 2002 (JOB(02)220) Japan, 28 Feb 2003 (JOB(03)41 G-20), 18 May 2006 (JOB(06)147) Japan and Switzerland, 30 Apr 2008 (JOB(08)34) Net Food-Importing Developing Countries, 6 Apr 2011 (JOBAG18). List of illustrations References Electronic reference Christophe Bellmann. Jonathan Hepburn and Marie Wilke . The Challenges Facing the Multilateral Trading System in Addressing Global Public Policy Objectives , International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement Online, 3 2012, Online since 27 February 2013, connection on 18 January 2017. URL. poldev. revues. org1012 DOI. 10.4000poldev.1012 About the authors Programmes Director at the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). He has previously worked for the Swiss Coalition of Development Organisations. He also was a Research Associate at the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean in Santiago. By this author Published in International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement . 6.2 2015 Published in International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement . 5.2 2014 Published in International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement . 2 2011 Published in International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement . 1 2010 Agriculture Programme Manager, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). Before joining ICTSD, he represented Oxfam International at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington, and led Oxfams global campaign on aid, debt and the Millennium Development Goals. He previously worked on trade, development and human rights issues at the Quaker United Nations Office in Geneva. By this author Published in International Development Policy Revue internationale de politique de dveloppement . 2 2011 International Trade Law Programme Officer at the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). Previously she worked for the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and for the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology. She holds a law degree from Hanse Law School and an LLM in Public International Law from Helsinki University (summa cum laude). Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.