Search results

At its inception, the Doha Round offered the hope of a more inclusive World Trade Organisation (WTO); one where developing countries in particular envisioned would allow them the policy space to enable their socio‐economic advancement even as they carried out their obligations as Member States of the rules‐based international trade system. While the rewards of this novel development round are awaited, WTO Member States are making a marked shift away from the foundation principles of multilateralism on non‐discriminatory treatment, and pursuing independent trade deals outside the rules. An emerging acceptance of this shift comes with an idea that countries can converge after divergence – that alternatives to multilateralism can still yield agreements that will operate in a multilateral rules‐based framework, post Doha. To this end, this article reviews the challenges facing the Doha negotiations as it pertains to developing country concerns and the shortcomings of the existing development framework. It critically examines the issues arising from the stalemate of the Doha negotiations and the efforts of the international trading system to continue engaging in trade in the face of globalisation, increasing unemployment, decreased wages and living standards in the backdrop of a global recession. It examines the emerging convergence theory which recognises departures from the uniform trading arrangements under multilateralism, without recognising this as a tacit acceptance of a return to protectionism with its consequences. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Reference is made to primary and secondary research material on the subject including WTO rules and agreements.

The article finds that the stalemate in this Doha Round reveals more than just dissatisfaction between Member States on the nature and scope of the rules that must guide their global trading activities. It reveals the fragility of rules and the potential inefficacy of a system that attempts to regulate nebulous activity – trade in the face of divergent needs and concerns.

The research is library/desk based.

This work is an original contribution and is not under consideration elsewhere.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with two of the so‐called BRIC countries, i.e. Brazil and India.

The scope of analysis will be the EU vis‐à‐vis Brazil and India, using two types of trade liberalization: bilateralism/regionalism and multilateralism.

It is found that Brazil and India want to become more important players; yet, they seem to lean against “old” powers (mainly the USA), and tend to focus on south‐south regionalism.

The present study provides a starting‐point for further research on the relationship between the European Union and the new leading powers.

This paper offers practical information to anyone interested in the role of Brazil and India in their relations with the EU, bilaterally/regionally and multilaterally.

Economic integration in the 21st century is driven largely by market signals, rather than by inter-governmental trading arrangements. It also means much more than “free trade.” Integration needs to consider all of the ways economies are connected in international markets, including trade in goods, services ideas and information, along with essential and complementary international movements of people and capital.

Except for a small number of sensitive products, especially in agriculture, most goods and services face no, or very low, formal trade barriers. Reducing border protection of the remaining sensitive products will certainly require negotiations, but they are no longer the most strategic obstacles to economic integration.

These days, the problems of most concern of those engaged in international commerce are logistics, communications, coping with security concerns and with different regulations in other economies. The effective constraint to designing and implementing cooperative arrangements to reduce such costs or risks of international commerce is the capacity to do so, rather than political resistance. Inter-governmental negotiations are not always necessary to deal with these practical issues.

Therefore, it should be possible to have a logical division of effort between APEC and the WTO in the Asia Pacific with the WTO dealing with those issues that do need to be negotiated; and APEC dealing with the many other issues where negotiations are not needed. In the longer term, an efficient division of labour could also emerge between the G20 and the WTO.

There is no single undertaking regulating food assistance at the international level. International food assistance is regulated by a patchwork of rules emanating from different institutions and normative arrangements. This study aims to explore how international law shapes international food assistance. How is international law regulating food assistance, considering this patchwork of institutions and norms? What dominant narratives enshrined in legal agreements shape the evolution of international food assistance?

The author uses the concept of “regime complex”, which allows analyzing partially overlapping and nonhierarchical regimes governing a particular issue, shedding light on the narratives and institutional arrangements that lead to the consolidation of international rules. The author identifies two main regimes that govern international food assistance: the food assistance regime and the food trade regime.

The author shows that using the “regime complex” concept clarifies the evolution of international food assistance, highlighting that international law is a crucial element in shaping international food assistance and showing that the two main institutional regimes governing it interact and shape rules along three main themes: the centrality of donor States’ self-interests, the relationship between international food assistance and trade liberalization and the goal of achieving food security for the beneficiaries.

Using the regime complex concept, the author brings new light on the broader institutional and legal framework influencing the governance of international food assistance, showing that different regimes take part in its shaping.

In 2017, it was a challenge to assess the future of global trade. It was an open question whether the US financial crisis and the recession that it triggered would mark a turning point for the liberal post–World War II world order. If one looked toward Europe, China, Latin America, and Japan, there was a flurry of activity. New trade agreements were being completed and pursued. In Washington, DC, on the other hand, President Donald Trump seemed set on ripping apart and/or renegotiating any trade deal the United States was ever part of.

This case explores Trump's opinions and emerging policy stance on trade, bilateralism, and the global economy, among others. It also gives an overview of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and asks whether the Trump presidency would constitute a major challenge to the WTO and what it stood for in 2017.

The purpose of this study is to contribute towards the debate about global access to COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics.

The global scramble for COVID-19 vaccine and other related pharmaceutical products have once again exposed the limitations of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). High-income countries are claiming a lion’s share of the first available batches of the COVID-19 vaccine in total disregard of the consequences such approach would have on the low-income countries that lack both the manufacturing wherewithal and the financial resources to purchase the vaccine and other products needed to combat the pandemic. This paper reviews the existing TRIPS Flexibilities and analyses their limitations with respect to equitable access of pharmaceutical products in times of health emergencies. This paper then considers the unique challenges that have been brought to the fore by the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, this paper analytically explores some options that have been proposed so far that the World Trade Organization (WTO) or governments can take in the immediate to near term to facilitate equitable access to COVID-19 pharmaceutical products and technologies. This research is non-empirical, desk-based research. It is, therefore, based on the literature review of existing body of work that is relevant to the topic under discussion. Mindful of the epistemological challenges that are always associated with desk-based research, part of the methodology of this work is to seek support from related empirical studies based on different philosophical underpinnings but that confirm the working hypothesis of this research.

This paper finds that there is still a need for a comprehensive reform of TRIPS Agreement to streamline the voluntary licencing system which is an important tool for low-income countries’ access to affordable pharmaceuticals. However, for purposes of dealing with COVID-19, WTO members should consider establishing pooled Licencing Facilities and procurement strategies via already existing political, economic or regional trade groupings.

This research is original. All sources have been acknowledged. This research synthesises different research papers and applies different viewpoints to the debate on the impact of the TRIPS Agreement on equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics.