The Doha Development Agenda at a Crossroads: What Are the Remaining Obstacles to the Conclusion of the Round – Part III?

Kessie, Edwini

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23309-8_17

Edwini Kessie³

Part of the book series: European Yearbook of International Economic Law ((EUROYEAR,volume 3))

1730 Accesses

Abstract

Following the inability of countries to resolve the outstanding negotiating issues in 2010, there was the widespread expectation that the modalities for agriculture and NAMA would be agreed before the summer of 2011, paving the way for the conclusion of the Doha Round in December 2011 when the WTO is scheduled to hold its Eighth Ministerial Conference. The view that the Round had to be concluded in 2011 was primarily because of the belief that it would be difficult to get the United States to engage in an election year (2012), meaning that the only possibility would be in 2013 and beyond. With the possibility that Members would lose interest and abandon the negotiations, the year started with a flurry of meetings. The initial signs were encouraging, as all the key players engaged bilaterally and plurilaterally to resolve the outstanding issues. The progress made in these negotiations led to the belief that revised texts could probably be produced before the Easter break, with the remaining issues resolved before the Ministerial meeting. In his statement to the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) on 2 February 2011, DG Lamy observed that “the change of gear and approach is detectable in both legs of the negotiating process, i.e. in the Negotiating Groups as well as in the bilateral and plurilateral consultations”. The progress made was evident in the genuine search for compromises. Members focused, inter alia, on textual proposals to bridge differences and remove square-bracketed texts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 129.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Sutherland, The Tragedy of Trade Blindness, available at: http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sutherland2/English.
2.
See, for example, the statement by the United States Trade Representative, Ron Kirk, at the Plenary Session of APEC Ministers regarding the Doha Round of World Trade Organization Talks in Big Sky, Montana, on 19th May, 2011.
3.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/tnc_dg_stat_02feb11_e.htm.
4.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sutherland2/English.
5.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/tnc_dg_infstat_29mar11_e.htm. See further DG Lamy’s statement to the World Bank’s Development Committee and the IMF’s International Monetary and Financial Committee in Washington on 16th April, 2011: “The WTO system is today in danger of not being able to conclude the Doha Development Round we started ten years ago. The optimism with which we started this year with has all but evaporated. WTO members have stalled on the last hurdles of the WTO Doha Round trade negotiations, i.e. industrial tariff reductions for developed and emerging economies. It is high time governments rise above narrow vested interests and consider the consequences of weakening the multilateral trading system which has so successfully helped resist protectionism during the crisis”, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/dgpl1_16apr11_e.htm.
6.
TN/C/13, 21st April, 2011, pp. 1–2.
7.
DG Lamy’s statement to the TNC on 29th April, 2011, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/tnc_dg_infstat_29apr11_e.htm.
8.
Ibid.
9.
Schwab, “Why the Negotiations Are Doomed and What We Should Do about It”, Foreign Affairs, May-June 2011. See further: http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/05/11/what_next_for_world_trade.
10.
Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest, 27th April, 2011, p. 3. Apart from trade facilitation and DFQF, other candidates for a possible „deliverables” package include fisheries subsides, environmental goods and services, clarification of the interface between specific trade obligations in multilateral environment agreements and WTO rules, information exchange between MEA secretariats and relevant WTOP Committees, elimination of all forms of export subsidies, cotton subsidies, dispute settlement improvements, tighter disciplines on non-tariff barriers on manufactured products, LDC waiver in services, non-tariff barriers and RTA transparency mechanism.
11.
Supra
12.
Sutherland, The Tragedy of Trade Blindness, available at: http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sutherland2/English.
13.
TN/AG/26, 21st April, 2011, p. 9.
14.
Ibid., p. 3, paras. 14–15.
15.
Ibid., p. 4, paras. 26–28.
16.
Ibid., p. 4, paras. 35–36.
17.
Ibid., p. 5, paras. 40–43.
18.
Ibid., p. 3, paras. 16–17.
19.
Ibid., p. 3, para. 25.
20.
Ibid., p. 2, paras. 8–11.
21.
Ibid., para. 11.
22.
TN/MA/W/103/Rev.3/Add1, 21st April, 2011, p. 3, para. 3.
23.
Ibid., pp. 1–2, paras. 2(ii)–(viii).
24.
Ibid., p. 1, para. 2(i).
25.
The countries are Australia, Brazil, China, the European Union, India, Japan and the United States.
26.
Proponents are seeking commitments in the following sectors: chemicals, industrial machinery, electronics and electrical products, enhanced health care, forest products, raw materials, gems and jewellery.
27.
TN/C/14, 21st April, 2011, p. 1, para. 4.
28.
Ibid., p. 2, para. 11.
29.
Ibid., p. 2, para. 12.
30.
Ibid., pp. 2–3, paras. 13–14.
31.
TN/S/36, 21st April, 2011, p. 2, para. 5.
32.
Ibid., p. 2, para. 6.
33.
Accounting services; air transport services; architecture, engineering and integrated engineering services; audiovisual services, computer-related services; construction services; distribution services; energy services; environmental services; financial services; legal services; logistics and related services; maritime transport services; postal and courier services, including Express Delivery; private education services:; services related to agriculture; telecommunication services and tourism services.
34.
Ibid., p. 11, para. 75.
35.
Ibid.
36.
Ibid., p. 12, paras. 79–82.
37.
Ibid., p. 12, para. 83.
38.
TN/CTD/26, 21st April, 2011, p. 3.
39.
Ibid.
40.
Ibid.
41.
TN/RL/W/254, 21st April, 2011, p. 1.
42.
Ibid. It would be recalled that among the difficult issues previously identified include zeroing, causation of injury, material retardation, the exclusion of related producers, product under consideration, information requests to affiliated parties, public interest and lesser duty, anti-circumvention, sunset reviews, third country dumping, special and differential treatment and technical assistance.
43.
Ibid.
44.
Ibid., p. 6.
45.
Ibid., p. 8.
46.
Ibid., p. 19.
47.
Ibid., p. 9.
48.
Ibid., p. 19.
49.
Ibid., p. 21.
50.
Ibid., p. 23.
51.
Ibid., pp. 27–28.
52.
Ibid., p. 37.
53.
Ibid., pp. 37–38.
54.
Ibid., pp. 38–39.
55.
Ibid., pp. 39–40.
56.
Ibid., pp. 40–41.
57.
Ibid., p. 41.
58.
Ibid.
59.
Ibid., p. 41–42.
60.
Ibid., pp. 42–44.
61.
Ibid., p. 46.
62.
Ibid., pp. 48–49.
63.
Ibid., p. 49.
64.
Ibid., p. 49–50.
65.
Ibid., p. 50.
66.
Ibid.
67.
Ibid., pp. 51–55.
68.
Ibid., pp. 55–62.
69.
Ibid., pp. 63–64.
70.
Ibid., p. 64.
71.
Ibid., p. 65.
72.
Ibid.
73.
Ibid., pp. 66–67.
74.
Ibid., p. 49.
75.
Ibid.
76.
TN/RL/W/253, 21st April, 2011.
77.
TN/TF/W/165/Rev.8, 21st April, 2011.
78.
Ibid., pp. 3–29.
79.
Ibid., pp. 30–35.
80.
Ibid., p. 35.
81.
Ibid., pp. 34–35.
82.
TN/IP/21, 21st April, 2011.
83.
Ibid., p. 3.
84.
Draft Composite Text, JOB/IP/3/Rev1, 20th April, 2011.
85.
Ibid., Sec. A, p. A-3.
86.
Ibid., Sec. B, pp. A-3-A4.
87.
Ibid., Sec. C, p. A-5.
88.
Ibid., Sec. D, pp. A-5-A6.
89.
Ibid., Sec. E, pp. A-7-A8.
90.
Ibid., p. A-8.
91.
Ibid.
92.
Ibid.
93.
Ibid., p. A-9.
94.
The other TRIPs issues being considered are whether the additional protection offered to wines and spirits should be extended to other products. While useful technical work has been done such the use of trademarks systems to protect GIs, there are still significant gaps in the position of Members. The other issue is the interface between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity. While there is broad support for the key principles of prior informed consent and equitable sharing of benefits, there are still significant gaps in Members positions, particularly as regards the need for a specific disclosure mechanism for genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The issue of “roll-back” is being considered in the agriculture negotiations.
95.
The Chairman stated that “everything is conditional in the deepest sense and requires further engagement and deliberations in open-ended session, consistent with the bottom-up, member-driven process, and our customary negotiating principles of inclusiveness and transparency”: TN/TE/20, 21st April, 2011.
96.
TN/TE/20, 21st April, 2011, p. 5.
97.
Ibid.
98.
Ibid.
99.
Ibid.
100.
Ibid., p. 6.
101.
Ibid.
102.
Ibid., p. 3.
103.
Ibid.
104.
One proposal focuses on identifying environmental goods on the basis of environmental projects, with broad criteria for designating such projects decided by the CTE using the six broad categories under which goods have been classified, namely (i) air pollution control; (ii) renewable energy, (iii) waste management and water treatment; (iv) environmental technologies, (v) carbon capture and storage and (vi) others. Another proposal advocates a request and offer process that would permit each member to designate its own list of environmental goods and assume liberalization commitments on that basis. Another proposal also envisages two lists – one for developed countries and the other for developing countries, with both being self-selected from the reference universe and on the understanding that list of developed countries would cover more products. There are other variations of this proposal, with some Members urging a common core list of products that could deliver an ambitious and significant outcome, and supplemented by a complementary list on which consensus could not be reached and from which Members would have to self-select a certain percentage to apply the treatment modalities. Another proposal advocates for a core common list to be supplemented by a development list covering products of interest to developing countries which tariffs would be eliminated or reduced significantly.
105.
A group of Members identified, on an illustrative and starting-point basis, 26 tariff lines drawn from the reference universe. Preliminary discussions showed that some of the goods included in this set could be considered by the membership as clear environmental goods, as long as they can be specifically identified in the HS classification by an ex-out or otherwise. See Annex II.B of the text.
106.
TN/TE/20, 21st April, 2011, p. 15.
107.
Ibid., pp. 15–19.
108.
Ibid., p. 4.
109.
Ibid., p. 4.
110.
Ibid., p. 4.
111.
JOB(08)/81, 18th July, 2008.
112.
TN/DS/25, 21st April, 2011, p. 1.
113.
Ibid.
114.
Ibid.
115.
Ibid.
116.
Ibid., pp. 1–2.

Acknowledgments

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and should not in any way be attributed to the WTO. Helpful comments were provided by Kofi Amenyah and Kofi Kusi Achampong.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

WTO, Centre William Rappard, Rue de Lausanne 154, 1211, Geneva 21, Switzerland
Edwini Kessie

Authors

Edwini Kessie
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edwini Kessie .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

European Law, European and, University of Passau Chair for Constitutional and Administrat, Passau, Germany
Christoph Herrmann
Department of European Law, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Jörg Philipp Terhechte

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kessie, E. (2012). The Doha Development Agenda at a Crossroads: What Are the Remaining Obstacles to the Conclusion of the Round – Part III?. In: Herrmann, C., Terhechte, J. (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2012. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23309-8_17

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23309-8_17
Published: 16 November 2011
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23308-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23309-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics