Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T22:44:02.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developing countries in the WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2010

ARUNABHA GHOSH
ARUNABHA GHOSH*
Affiliation:
Oxford-Princeton Global Leaders Fellow, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
*
*Email: arunabhaghosh@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) has been an integral part of the GATT/WTO since 1989 and shoulders a fundamental responsibility in making the regime more transparent. This paper asks: how has the TPRM responded to demands from developing countries for information and transparency? The paper uses a typology of information systems to explain the evolution of surveillance in the trade regime and asks whether the TPRM was assigned the functions of an ideal-type information system. The paper, then, evaluates the performance of the TPRM against its given mandate of increasing transparency to promote improved adherence with trade rules. It presents, for the first time, empirical evidence on the content of reports and the participation of countries, to highlight persisting content- and participation-related challenges. It discusses the capacity challenges within the WTO Secretariat and briefly outlines efforts made by developing countries to boost surveillance capacity at home. The paper ends by outlining priorities for monitoring in the trade regime: generating specific information that developing countries need, supporting domestic capacity for surveillance (including from non-official sources), and concentrating on improved peer review and follow-up procedures.

Monitoring and surveillance is the rising agenda of the WTO.

Pascal Lamy1

Type
Review Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , July 2010 , pp. 419 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © Arunabha Ghosh 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Kenneth W. (1993), ‘“Trust, but Verify”: The Production of Information in Arms Control Treaties and Other International Agreements’, Cornell International Law Journal, 26: 1–58.Google Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W. and Snidal, Duncan (1998), ‘Why States Act through Formal International Organizations’, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(1): 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, Kenneth W. and Snidal, Duncan (2009), ‘The Governance Triangle: Regulatory Standards Institutions and the Shadow of the State’, in Mattli, Walter and Woods, Ngaire (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, pp. 72–134.Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert and Keohane, Robert O. (1986), ‘Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions’, in Oye, Kenneth A. (ed.), Cooperation Under Anarchy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, p. 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackhurst, Richard (1988), ‘Strengthening GATT Surveillance of Trade-Related Policies’, in Hilf, Meinharf and Petersman, Ernst-Ulrich (eds.), The New GATT Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Legal and Economic Aspects, Deventer: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, pp. 123–155.Google Scholar
Borrmann, Axel and Koopman, Georg (2002), Adapting the WTO Trade Policy Reviews to the Needs of Developing Countries: Starting Points and Options, Hamburg: Hamburgisches Welt-Wirtschafts-Archiv.Google Scholar
Chayes, Abram and Chayes, Antonia Handler (1993), ‘On Compliance’, International Organization, 47(2): 175–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1995), The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Curzon Price, Victoria (1991), ‘GATT's New Trade Policy Review Mechanism’, The World Economy, 14(2): 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1992), ‘New Institutional Developments in GATT’, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, 1(1): 87–110.Google Scholar
da Motta Veiga, Pedro (2005), ‘Brazil and the G20 Group of Developing Countries’, in Gallagher, Peter, Low, Patrick and Stoler, Andrew L. (eds.), Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation: 45 Case Studies, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, Xinyuan (2002), ‘Information Systems in Treaty Regimes’, World Politics, 54(4): 405–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhar, Biswajit and Kallummal, Murali (2007), ‘Trade Policy Off the Hook: The Making of Indian Trade Policy since the Uruguay Round’, in Halle, Mark and Wolfe, Robert (eds.), Process Matters: Sustainable Development and Domestic Trade Transparency, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development, pp. 183–240.Google Scholar
Downs, George W. and Jones, Michael A. (2002), ‘Reputation, Compliance and International Law’, Journal of Legal Studies, 31(1): S95–S114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupont, Cédric, Beverelli, Cosimo, and Pézard, Stéphanie (2006), ‘Learning in Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Some Results from Simulation for Developing Countries’, in Odell, John S. (ed.), Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 145–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francois, Joseph F. (2001a), ‘Maximising the Benefits of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism for Developing Countries’, in Hoekman, Bernard and Martin, Will (eds.), Developing Countries and the WTO: A Pro-Active Agenda, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 147–165.Google Scholar
(2001b), ‘Trade Policy Transparency and Investor Confidence: Some Implications for an Effective Trade Policy Review Mechanism’, Review of International Economics, 9(2): 303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GATT, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (1987a), ‘The 1954/55 Review Session – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/12, 14 August.Google Scholar
(1987b), ‘Communication from Jamaica’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/11, 8 July.Google Scholar
(1987c), ‘Communication from Canada’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/10, 2 July.Google Scholar
(1987d), ‘Initial Submission by the United States to the Uruguay Round Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/9, 23 June.Google Scholar
(1987), ‘Communication from Japan – Proposal for the Trade Policy Review in the GATT’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/8, 23 June.Google Scholar
(1987f), ‘Existing Surveillance Functions in the GATT – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/3, 9 June.Google Scholar
(1987g), ‘Communication from Australia’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/1, 3 April.Google Scholar
(1987h), ‘Meeting of 28 September 1987 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/3, 8 October.Google Scholar
(1987i), ‘Meeting of 23 June 1987 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/2, 26 June.Google Scholar
(1987j), ‘Meeting of 7 April 1987 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/1, 10 April.Google Scholar
(1988a), ‘Statement by the Delegation of Jamaica’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/29, 30 September.Google Scholar
(1988b), ‘Communication from the Delegation of India’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/23, 22 June.Google Scholar
(1988c), ‘Communication from the Delegation of Jamaica’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/22, 16 May.Google Scholar
(1988d), ‘Communication from the European Community’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/20, 22 March.Google Scholar
(1988e), ‘Communication from the Nordic Countries’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/W/17, 28 January.Google Scholar
(1988f), ‘Meeting of 20 and 22 June 1988 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/8, 13 July.Google Scholar
(1988g), ‘Meeting of 21–23 March 1988 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/6, 15 April.Google Scholar
(1989a), ‘Functioning of the GATT System: Decisions of 12 April 1989’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, L/6490, 12 April.Google Scholar
(1989b), ‘Meeting of 19–20 June 1989 – Note by the Secretariat’, Negotiating Group on Functioning of the GATT System, MTN.GNG/NG14/12, 30 June.Google Scholar
(1994), ‘Jamaica – Statement by the Hon. Paul Robertson, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade’, GATT Trade Negotiations Committee, MTN.TNC/MIN(94)/ST/36, 13 April.Google Scholar
Ghosh, Arunabha (2008), ‘See no Evil, Speak no Evil?: The WTO, the Trade Policy Review Mechanism, and Developing Countries’, D.Phil. Thesis, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
(2010), ‘Strengthening WTO Surveillance: Making Transparency Work for Developing Countries’, in Deere-Birkbeck, Carolyn (ed.), Making Global Trade Governance Work for Development (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Gong, Baihua (2005), ‘Shanghai's WTO Affairs Consultation Center: Working Together to Take Advantage of WTO Membership’, in Gallagher, Peter, Low, Patrick, and Stoler, Andrew L. (eds.), Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation: 45 Case Studies, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 167–177.Google Scholar
ICONE, Institute for International Trade Negotiations (2008), ‘About ICONE – Institute for International Trade Negotiations’, http://www.iconebrasil.org.br/en/?actA=1&areaID=4&secaoID=2&conteudoID=4, accessed 5 June 2008.Google Scholar
Independent Evaluation Office of the IMF (2006), An Evaluation of the IMF's Multilateral Surveillance, Washington, DC: IMF.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund (1999), External Evaluation of IMF Surveillance – Report by a Group of Independent Experts, Washington, DC: IMF.Google Scholar
Keesing, Donald B. (1998), Improving Trade Policy Reviews in the World Trade Organization, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. (1983), ‘The Demand for International Regimes’, in Krasner, Stephen D. (ed.), International Regimes, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, pp. 141–171.Google Scholar
(1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. (1986), ‘Reciprocity in International Relations’, International Organization, 40(1): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. and Martin, Lisa L. (1995), ‘The Promise of Institutionalist Theory’, International Security, 20(1): 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan (2001), ‘The Rational Design of International Institutions’, International Organization, 55(4): 761–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamy, Pascal (2007), ‘Monitoring and Surveillance: The Rising Agenda of the WTO’, Address to Georgetown University Law Centre, Washington, DC, 22 October.Google Scholar
Leutwiler, Fritz, Bradley, Bill, Gyllenhammar, Pehr G., de Lacharrière, Guy Ladreit, Patel, I. G., Simonsen, Mario H. and Djojohadikusumo, Sumitro (1985), Trade Policies for a Better Future: Proposals for Action, Geneva: GATT.Google Scholar
Lombardi, Domenico and Woods, Ngaire (2008), ‘The Politics of Influence: An Analysis of IMF Surveillance’, Review of International Political Economy, 15(5): 711–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattli, Walter (2001), ‘Private Justice in a Global Economy: From Litigation to Arbitration’, International Organization, 55(4): 919–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattli, Walter and Woods, Ngaire (2009), ‘In Whose Benefit? Explaining Regulatory Change in Global Politics’, in Mattli, Walter and Woods, Ngaire (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation, Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press, pp. 1–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mavroidis, Petros C. (1991–1992), ‘Surveillance Schemes: The GATT's New Trade Policy Review Mechanism’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 13(2): 374–414.Google Scholar
Milgrom, Paul, North, Douglas, and Weingast, Barry R. (1990), ‘The Role of Institutions in the Revival of Trade: The Medieval Law Merchant, Private Judges, and the Champagne Fairs’, Economics and Politics 1: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Ronald B. (1994), ‘Regime Design Matters: Intentional Oil Pollution and Treaty Compliance’, International Organization, 48(3): 425–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998), ‘Sources of Transparency: Information Systems in International Regimes’, International Studies Quarterly, 42(1): 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narlikar, Amrita (2002), ‘The Politics of Participation: Decision-Making Processes and Developing Countries in the World Trade Organization’, The Round Table, 91(364): 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005), The World Trade Organization: A very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Odell, John S. (2006), ‘Introduction’, in Odell, John S. (ed.), Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor (1990), Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qureshi, Asif H. (1990), ‘The New GATT Trade Policy Review Mechanism: An Exercise in Transparency Or “Enforcement”?’ Journal of World Trade, 24(3): 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, Kal (2001), ‘Reporting and Review Institutions in 10 Multilateral Environmental Agreements’, United Nations Environment Programme.Google Scholar
(2003–2004), ‘Police Patrols and Fire Alarms in the NAAEC’, Loyola of Los AngelesInternational and Comparative Law Review, 26(3): 389–413.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael (2007), Reputation and International Cooperation: Sovereign Debt across Three Centuries, Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Victor, David G., Raustiala, Kal, and Skolnikoff, Eugene B. (eds.) (1998), The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice, Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Robert and Helmer, Jesse (2007), ‘Trade Policy Begins at Home: Information and Consultation in the Trade Policy Process’, in Halle, Mark and Wolfe, Robert (eds.), Process Matters: Sustainable Development and Domestic Trade Transparency, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
WTO, World Trade Organization (1995), ‘Procedural Improvements to the Trade Policy Review Mechanism – Note by the Chairman’, Trade Policy Review Body, WT/TPR/13, 13 December.Google Scholar
(2002), ‘Report to the General Council’, Committee on Trade and Development Special Session, TN/CTD/3, 26 July.Google Scholar