Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T03:42:37.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - The influence of international non-state actors in multilateral and preferential trade agreements: a question of forum shopping?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Maria Perez-Esteve
Affiliation:
Information and External Affairs Division, WTO Secretariat
Ann Capling
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Patrick Low
Affiliation:
World Trade Organization, Geneva
Get access

Summary

Introduction

This chapter examines the influence that non-state actors (NSAs) seek to exert on trade policy formulation at the WTO multilateral level and at the national governmental level. The analysis focuses on international NSAs that have a substantial presence in Geneva, either because they are based there or because they seek to engage on a regularized basis with the WTO. The main objectives of this chapter are to explore how these NSAs seek to influence trade policy development, both at the WTO and the national level, especially in relation to the question of forum choice: that is, the relative benefits of negotiating multilaterally or preferentially. It also investigates whether those NSAs involved in trade policy-making consider the WTO versus PTAs as a form of ‘forum-shopping’ to pursue their particular agendas, interests and objectives.

The analysis focuses on three main categories of NSAs: namely, business organizations, trade unions, and civil society organizations (CSOs). Research for this chapter has been largely gathered through surveys and was complemented, in some cases, with structured interviews with a number of Geneva-based NSA representatives.

The structure of the chapter is as follows. Section 2 describes how NSAs seek to influence trade policy formulation at both the multilateral and national governmental level. It also examines how NSAs seek to exert influence from the perspective of their aims and interests. Section 3 looks at the influence that NSAs aim to exert on trade policy formulation at the multilateral and national governmental level in relation to the negotiation of PTAs, and tries to determine whether this can be considered a form of ‘forum shopping’. Section 4 puts forth the study’s main findings and conclusions.

Type
Chapter
Information
Governments, Non-State Actors and Trade Policy-Making
Negotiating Preferentially or Multilaterally?
, pp. 284 - 310
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 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

Barton, J. H., Goldstein, J. L., Josling, T. E. and Steinberg, R. H. 2006. The Evolution of the Trade Regime: Politics, Law, and Economics of the GATT and the WTO. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Busch, M. L. 2007. ‘Overlapping Institutions, Forum Shopping, and Dispute Settlement in International Trade’, International Organization 61: 735–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charnovitz, S. 2000. ‘Opening the WTO to Nongovernmental Interests’, Fordham International Law Review 24, 1/2: 173–216.Google Scholar
Consumer Unity & Trust Society International (CUTS) 2009. Improving Ownership through Inclusive Trade Policy Making Processes: Lessons from Africa. Jaipur Printers P. Ltd.Google Scholar
Ebert Stiftung, Friedrich (FES) 2009. The Cotonou Scenarios: Negotiations on the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the European Union and West Africa. Cotonou: Editions COPEF.Google Scholar
Global Union Research Network (GURN) 2005. ‘Report of the Online Discussion on Bilateral and Regional Trade Agreements’.
He, B. and Murphy, H. 2007. ‘Global Social Justice at the WTO? The Role of NGOs in Constructing Global Social Contracts’, International Affairs 83, 4: 707–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hocking, B. and McGuire, S. (eds.) 2004. Trade Politic. London: Routledge.CrossRef
Hoekman, M. and Kostecki, M. 2001. The Political Economy of the World Trading System. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, R., Goetz, A. M., Scholte, J. A. and Williams, M. 2000. Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Institutions and Global Social Movements. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostry, S. 2002. ‘Preface’, ‘The Trade Policy-Making Process: Level One of the Two-Level Game: Country Studies in the Western Hemisphere’, INTAL-ITD-STA (Inter-American Development Bank), Occasional Paper No. 13, Institute for the Integration of Latin America and the Caribbean and the Inter-American Developmental Bank, Buenos Aires, pp. i–iv.Google Scholar
Oxfam, 2009. ‘Empty Promises, What Happened to “Development” in the WTO’s Doha Round?’, Oxfam Briefing Paper, No. 131, 16 July.
Sell, S. and Prakash, A. 2004. ‘Using Ideas Strategically: The Contest Between Business and NGO Networks in Intellectual Property Rights’, International Studies Quarterly 48, 1: 143–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slaughter, A. 2004. A New World Order. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Teegen, H., Doh, J. and Vachani, S. 2004. ‘The Importance of Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) in Global Governance and Value Creation: An International Business Research Agenda’, Journal of International Business Studies 35: 463–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, R. and Helmer, J. 2007. ‘Trade Policy Begins at Home: Information and Consultation in the Trade Policy Process’, in Halle, M. and Wolfe, R. (eds.), Process Matters: Sustainable Development and Domestic Trade Transparency. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) 2007. World Trade Report – Six Decades of Multilateral Trade Cooperation: What Have we Learned?Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) 2008. How Can the WTO Help Harness Globalization? 2007 WTO Public Forum, Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) 2009. Trading into the Future. 2008 WTO Public Forum, Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) 2010. Global Problems, Global Solutions: Towards Better Global Governance. 2009 WTO Public Forum, Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
Zahrnt, V. 2008. ‘Domestic Constituents and the Formulation of WTO Negotiating Positions: What the Delegates Say’, World Trade Review 7, 2: 393–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×