Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T22:48:52.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Trade liberalisation under the GATS: An odyssey?

from PART 3 - The limits of request–offer negotiations: Plurilateral and alternative approaches to services liberalisation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2009

Marion Panizzon
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Nicole Pohl
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Pierre Sauvé
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science, Universität Bern, Switzerland
Get access

Summary

In over seven years, the services negotiations under the GATS have produced little, if any, progress in terms of commercially meaningful offers. A number of Members elected to remain on the sidelines, sometimes despite significant autonomous liberalisation, while others confined their offers to predominantly cosmetic improvements of existing commitments. The absence of momentum stands in remarkable contrast to what has happened in other fora. It looks as if governments are reluctant to ‘squander’ negotiating coinage at the multilateral level, which they are pleased to use in a bilateral or regional context. Against this background, this chapter discusses why the momentum that has driven past trade rounds under the GATT has not, or not yet, been discernible. While the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration may be viewed as an encouraging response to the deplorable state of play, the services negotiations have since fallen victim to (non-)events in other areas, notably agriculture and non-agricultural market access. The litmus test on Members’ readiness to promote multilateral services liberalisation or, as a minimum, to bring their offers more closely into line with applied regimes, is thus still outstanding. Also, doubts linger whether the explicit exemption of LDCs, in paragraph 26 of the Hong Kong Declaration, from the expectation to undertake new commitments is in these countries’ best economic interest. There is little reason to assume that they would not benefit as well from binding ongoing reform projects or at least past reforms that have been tested successfully in practice.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

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

Adlung, Rudolf, ‘General Agreement on Trade in Services and Democratic Legitimacy’, Aussenwirtschaft 59 (2004), pp. 127–149.Google Scholar
Adlung, Rudolf,‘Services Negotiations in the Doha Round: Lost in Flexibility?’, Journal of International Economic Law 9 (2006), pp. 865–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adlung, Rudolf,‘Negotiations on Safeguards and Subsidies in Services: A Never-Ending Story?’, Journal of International Economic Law 10 (2007), pp. 235–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adlung, Rudolf,‘The Contribution of Services Liberalization to Poverty Reduction: What Role for the GATS?’, Journal of World Investment & Trade 8 (2007) 4 (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adlung, Rudolf and Roy, Martin, ‘Turning Hills into Mountains? Current Commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services and Prospects for Change’, Journal of World Trade 6 (2005), pp. 1161–1194.Google Scholar
Banga, Rashmi, ‘Do Investment Agreements Matter?’, Journal of Economic Integration 21 (2006), pp. 40–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banga, RashmiGoldar, Bishwanath, ‘Contribution of Services to Output Growth and Productivity in Indian Manufacturing: Pre and Post Reforms’, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER, 2004), Working Paper No.139.
Bosworth, Malcolm and Narjoko, Dionisius A., ‘Desirability, Feasibility and Options for Establishing emergency safeguard mechanism within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Framework on Services’ (2006) REPSF Project No. 05/007, Final Report.
Bressie, Kent, Kende, Michael and Williams, Howard, ‘Telecommunications Trade Liberalization and the World Trade Organization’, (2005) 7 info 3–24 at 20.
Elkins, Zachary, Guzman, Andrew T. and Simmons, Beth A., ‘Competing for Capital: The Diffusion of Bilateral Investment Treaties, 1960–2000’, International Organization 60 (2006), pp. 811–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoekman, Bernard, ‘Liberalizing Trade in Services: A Survey’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (WPS 4030, 2006).
Krugman, Paul, ‘What Should Trade Negotiators Negotiate About?’, Journal of Economic Literature 35 (1997), pp. 113–120.Google Scholar
Mattoo, Aaditya, ‘China's Accession to the World Trade Organization: The Services Dimension’, Journal of International Economic Law 6 (2003), pp. 299–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattoo, Aaditya,‘Services in a Development Round: Proposals for Overcoming Inertia’, in Newfarmer, Richard (ed.), Trade, Doha, and Development (Washington, DC: The World Bank, 2006), pp. 161–174.Google Scholar
Messerlin, Patrick, ‘Three Variations on “The Future of the World Trade Organization”’, Journal of International Economic Law 8 (2005), pp. 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Trade Directorate, ‘Logistics and Time as a Trade Barrier’ (2006) Trade Policy Working Paper No. 35 (TD/TC/WP(2006)3/Final).
Okun, Arthur M., Equality and Efficiency – The Big Tradeoff (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution).
Roessler, Frieder, ‘The Scope, Limits and Function of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Legal System’, World Economy 8 (1985), 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,UN Conference on Trade and Development, Systemic Issues in International Investment Agreements (IIAS), international investment agreement Monitor No. 1 (2006) 2 (UN Conference on Trade and Development/WEB/ITE/IIA/2006/2).
,UN Conference on Trade and Development, The Entry into Force of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), international investment agreement Monitor No. 3 (2006) 3 (UN Conference on Trade and Development/WEB/ITE/IIA/2006/9).
,World Bank, Global Economic Prospects (Washington, DC: The World Bank, 2002).
,World Trade Organization, Report by the Consultative Board, chaired by Sutherland, Peter, to the Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi, ‘The Future of the World Trade Organization’ (Geneva: World Trade Organization, 2004).

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
×