Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2017
  • Online publication date: November 2017

17 - The WTO-Plus Obligations: Dual Class or a Strengthened System?

from PART III - Accessions Acquis: Thematic Perspectives and Implementation Challenges
Summary

Abstract

Obligations in accession protocols that go beyond the multilateral trade agreements are commonly referred to as ‘WTO-plus’ obligations. This chapter reviews the so-called WTO-plus obligations and argues that even though they are perceived to expand the existing obligations under multilateral trade agreements, they in fact do not create two classes of membership within the World Trade Organization (WTO). First, all accession processes are conducted on a case-by-case basis, and thus result in different obligations for each acceding government. Second, the WTO legal system is evolving continuously; therefore, to adopt new rules and advance the legal system, obligations cannot remain the same as in previous accessions. Third, non-discrimination remains one of the fundamental principles of the multilateral trading system. Accessions to WTO follow this principle and hence WTO-plus obligations have been and will continue to be set on a non-discriminatory basis. At the same time, WTO-plus obligations help upgrade the rules-based multilateral trading system. They fill gaps in the WTO rules on anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard regimes, and they advance WTO rules by promoting plurilateral agreements.

WTO-plus obligations represent specific obligations contained in accession protocols that are perceived to expand the existing obligations under multilateral trade agreements and go beyond the existing requirements (Qin, 2016). The term ‘WTO-plus obligations’ has been widely used in the literature and addressed by trade negotiators. However, the content of such obligations is yet to be specifically and consensually defined by multilateral trade policy negotiators.

Unlike negotiations for accession to other international organizations, negotiations for accession to the WTO are open-ended. Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO Agreement) does not put any limit on the ‘terms to be agreed’ between acceding governments and WTO members, including obligations the acceding governments shall undertake. All members that joined the WTO through accession, in contrast to those General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) contracting parties which automatically became members of the WTO upon its creation in 1995, negotiated their terms and conditions of membership on a case-by-case basis, using the national legislation of each applicant as the starting point.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Trade Multilateralism in the Twenty-First Century
  • Online ISBN: 9781108367745
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108367745
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
Cattaneo, O. and Primo Braga, C. A. (2009). ‘Everything You Always Wanted to Know About WTO Accession (But Were Afraid to Ask)’, Policy Research Working Paper, WPS 5116. The World Bank. Retrieved from http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/1813-9450-5116.
Charnovitz, S. (2007). ‘Mapping the Law of WTO Accession’, in Janow, M. E., Donaldson, V. and Yanovich, A. (eds.), The WTO: Governance, Dispute Settlement, and Developing Countries. Huntington, NY, Juris Publishing, pp. 855–920.
Chen, C. (ed.) (2009). China's Integration with the Global Economy: WTO Accession, Foreign Direct Investment and International Trade. Cheltenham. Edward Elgar.
Dadush, U. and Osakwe, C. (2015). ‘A Reflection on Accessions as the WTO Turns Twenty’, in Dadush, U. and Osakwe, C. (eds.), WTO Accessions and Trade Multilateralism: Case Studies and Lessons from the WTO at Twenty. WTO, Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–24.
Fung, H.-G., Pei, C. and Zhang, K. H (eds.) (2006). China and the Challenge of Economic Globalization: The Impact of WTO Membership. Armonk, NY, M.E. Sharpe.
Marceau, G. (2002). ‘A Map of the World Trade Organization Law of Domestic Regulation of Goods: The Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade’, Journal of World Trade, 36(5): 811–81.
Marceau, G. and Trachtman, P. J. (2014). ‘A Map of the World Trade Organization Law of Domestic Regulation of Goods: The Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade’, Journal of World Trade, 48(2): 351–432. Retrieved from www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TRAD2014013.
Osakwe, C. (2011). ‘Developing Countries and GATT/WTO Rules: Dynamic Transformations in Trade Policy Behaviour and Performance’, Minnesota Journal of International Law, 20(2): 365–436. Retrieved from www.minnjil.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Osakwe-Final-Version.pdf.
Osakwe, C. (2015). ‘Contributions and Lessons From WTO Accessions: The Present and Future of the Rules-Based Multilateral Trading System’, in Dadush, U. and Osakwe, C. (eds.), WTO Accessions and Trade Multilateralism: Case Studies and Lessons from the WTO at Twenty. WTO, Cambridge University Press, pp. 219–308.
Qin, J. Y. (2003). ‘ “WTO-Plus” Obligations and Their Implications for the World Trade Organization Legal System – An Appraisal of the China Accession Protocol’, Journal of World Trade, 37(3): 483–522.
Qin, J. Y. (2016). ‘Mind the Gap: Navigating between the WTO Agreement and its Accession Protocols’, Wayne State University Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series, No. 2016-05. Retrieved from www.ssrn.com/link/Wayne-State-U-LEG.html.
Williams, P. J. (2008). A Handbook on Accession to the WTO. WTO Secretariat Publication, Cambridge University Press.
Yamaoka, T. (2013). ‘Analysis of China's Accession Commitments in the WTO: New Taxonomy of More and Less Stringent Commitments, and the Struggle for Mitigation by China’, Journal of World Trade, 47(1): 105–58.
Yang, D. T., Chen, V. and Monarch, R. (2010). ‘Rising Wages: Has China Lost its Global Labour Advantage?’ Bonn, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit/Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA). Discussion Paper No. 5008, June.