Advertisement

Searching for Justice in International Trade Negotiations: A Feminist-Informed Multi-Sited Ethnographic Study of the Commonwealth Caribbean

  • Lisa M. Samuel
Chapter

Abstract

World Trade Organization negotiations involve asymmetrical parties. This has led to issues of justice and power being raised at various stages of the negotiations. Yet the voices of the small, developing, less powerful states in this context remain severely understudied. In this chapter, Samuel demonstrates that feminist-informed multi-sited ethnography allows for the uncovering and analysis of the viewpoints of elites from these states responsible for framing trade-negotiating strategy and policy. This methodological approach elucidates the metaphor around which such policies and strategies are formulated: that of “justice” as involving global economic governance processes which allow for the development of state capacities for autonomous decision-making, and which involves inclusive democratic processes that acknowledge differences between states and the significance of such differences in the context of international trade. This reformulation of justice that takes into account such differences between states allows for more adequate policy responses than those offered in the absence of such understandings. The results of this study also yield guidance for policy makers and researchers as to how to reference, and implement, this particular conceptualization of justice to improve the effectiveness of international trade negotiations and their outcomes.

References

  1. Ackerly, Brooke A., and Jacqui True. 2010. Doing Feminist Research in Political and Social Science. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackerly, Brooke A., Maria A. Stern, and Jacqui True, eds. 2006. Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Albin, Cecilia. 2001. Justice and Fairness in International Negotiation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barton, John H., Judith L. Goldstein, Timothy E. Josling, and Richard H. Steinberg. 2006. The Evolution of the Trade Regime: Politics, Law, and Economics of the GATT and the WTO. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beneria, Lourdes. 2003. Gender, Development, and Globalization: Economics as if All People Mattered. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bernal, Richard. 2006. Special and Differential Treatment for Small Developing Economies. In WTO at the Margins: Small States and the Multilateral Trading System, ed. Roman Grynberg, 309–355. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ———. 2013. Globalization, Trade, and Economic Development: The CARIFORUM-EU Economic Partnership Agreement. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, Andrew G., and Robert M. Stern. 2007. Concepts of Fairness in the Global Trading System. Pacific Economic Review 12 (3): 293–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carmody, Chios, Frank J. Garcia, and John Linarelli. 2012. Global Justice and International Economic Law: Opportunities and Prospects. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Chang, Ha-Joon. 2002. Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cohn, Carol. 2006. Motive and Methods: Using Multi-Sited Ethnography to Study US National Security Discourses. In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, ed. Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria A. Stern, and Jacqui True, 91–107. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Franck, Thomas M. 1995. Fairness in International Law and Institutions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gallagher, Kevin P. 2008. Understanding Developing Country Resistance to the Doha Round. Review of International Political Economy 15 (1): 62–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Garcia, Frank J. 2003. Trade, Inequality, and Justice: Toward a Liberal Theory of Just Trade. New York: Transnational Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Geertz, Clifford. 1988. Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Girvan, Norman. 2000. Globalisation and Counter-Globalisation: The Caribbean in the Context of the South. In Globalisation: A Calculus of Inequality—Perspectives from the South, ed. Denis Benn and Kenneth Hall, 65–87. Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Harding, Sandra. 1993. Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What Is ‘Strong Objectivity’? In Feminist Epistemologies, ed. Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter, 49–82. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hartsock, Nancy C.M. 1987. The Feminist Standpoint. In Feminism and Methodology, ed. Sandra Harding, 157–180. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Harvey, David. 2009. Cosmopolitanism and the Geographies of Freedom. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hawkesworth, M.E. 1989. Knowers, Knowing, Known. In Feminist Theory in Practice and Process, ed. Micheline Malson, Jean O’Barr, Sandra Westphal-Wihl, and Mary Wyer, 327–351. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hillman, Richard S., and Thomas J. D’Agostino. 2009. Understanding the Contemporary Caribbean. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Kapstein, Ethan B. 2006. Economic Justice in an Unfair World: Toward a Level Playing Field. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kaushik, Atul, and Julian Mukiibi. 2011. LDC Priorities for Improved Global Trade Governance. In Making Global Trade Governance Work for Development, ed. Carolyn Deere Birkbeck, 181–203. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lie, Jon Harald Sande. 2013. Challenging Anthropology: Anthropological Reflections on the Ethnographic Turn in International Relations. Millennium-Journal of International Studies 41 (2): 201–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacKay, Joseph, and Jamie Levin. 2015. Hanging Out in International Politics: Two Kinds of Explanatory Political Ethnography. International Studies Review 17 (2): 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marcus, George. 1995. Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 24 (1): 95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mikecz, Robert. 2012. Interviewing Elites: Addressing Methodological Issues. Qualitative Inquiry 18 (6): 482–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nagar, R., V. Lawson, L. McDowell, and S. Hanson. 2002. Locating Globalization: Feminist (Re)readings of the Subjects and Spaces of Globalization. Economic Geography 78 (3): 257–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nagel, Thomas. 1986. The View from Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Pachirat, Timothy. 2009. The Political in Political Ethnography: Dispatches from the Kill Floor. In Political Ethnography: What Immersion Contributes to the Study of Power, ed. Edward Schatz, 143–162. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Pader, Ellen. 2006. Seeing with an Ethnographic Sensibility. In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, 161–175. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  32. Perlmutter, David D. 2015. In Defense of Ethnography. The Chronicle of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  33. Pogge, Thomas, and Darrel Moellendorf. 2008. Global Justice: Seminal Essays. Minnesota: Paragon House.Google Scholar
  34. Rajak, Dinah. 2011. From Boardrooms to Mineshafts: In Pursuit of Global Corporate Citizenship. In Multi-Sited Ethnography: Problems and Possibilities in the Translocation of Research Methods, ed. Simon Coleman and Pauline von Hellermann, 106–123. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Risse, Mathias. 2015. On Global Justice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Samuel, Lisa. 2015. When Negotiating Trade Means Negotiating Difference: WTO Insights. Social and Economic Studies 64 (2): 91–125.Google Scholar
  37. Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, and Dvora Yanow. 2006. ‘Reading’ ‘Methods’ Texts’: How Research Methods Texts Construct Political Science. Political Research Quarterly 55: 457–486.Google Scholar
  38. Shehata, Sameer. 2006. Ethnography, Identity, and the Production of Knowledge. In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, 209–227. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  39. Wedeen, Lisa. 2010. Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 13: 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Weldon, S. Laurel. 2006. Inclusion and Understanding: A Collective Methodology for Feminist International Relations. In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, ed. Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria A. Stern, and Jacqui True, 62–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yanow, Dvora. 2006. Neither Rigorous Nor Objective? Interrogating Criteria for Knowledge Claims in Interpretive Science. In Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, ed. Dvora Yanow and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, 67–88. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  42. Yanow, Dvora, and Peregrine Schwartz-Shea, eds. 2006. Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  43. Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. ———. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisa M. Samuel
    • 1
  1. 1.New York UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations