IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v8y2009i02p279-314_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The political economy of WTO accession: the unfinished business of universal membership

Author

Listed:
  • JONES, KENT

Abstract

While the WTO now represents most of the world's population, GDP, and trade, the accession process since its founding has been lengthy, and it is getting longer. Compared to its predecessor, the GATT, the WTO applies a much more detailed and legalistic approach to accession, due to its broader scope of policy coverage and the enforcement powers of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. In WTO accession cases, WTO incumbent members have a superior bargaining position. The present study provides evidence that the elapsed time from WTO application to accession has increased with the number of completed accessions, suggesting a process of learning by WTO members to bargain for more demanding concessions from applicants. Regarding the terms of accession, the number of rules commitments has increased, and the level of bound tariffs has fallen, as the number of completed accessions has increased. In view of the difficult cases remaining in order to complete universal WTO membership, the author proposes more flexibility in accession requirements, along the lines of the GATT tradition.

Suggested Citation

  • Jones, Kent, 2009. "The political economy of WTO accession: the unfinished business of universal membership," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 279-314, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:8:y:2009:i:02:p:279-314_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474745609004261/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kent Jones & Yunwei Gai, 2013. "Joining the WTO: Why Does It Take So Long?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 695-716, September.
    2. Vasily Astrov & Mahdi Ghodsi & Mario Holzner & David Pichler & Leon Podkaminer, 2019. "Monthly Report No. 11/2019," wiiw Monthly Reports 2019-11, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    3. Steve Charnovitz, 2010. "A Post-Montesquieu Analysis of the WTO," Working Papers 2010-3, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    4. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Effect of Aid for Trade flows on the Accession to the World Trade Organization," EconStor Preprints 261331, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    5. Roy, Martin, 2010. "Endowments, power, and democracy: Political economy of multilateral commitments on trade in services," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2010-11, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    6. Buettner, Thiess & Madzharova, Boryana, 2018. "WTO membership and the shift to consumption taxes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 197-218.
    7. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "Effect of the duration of membership in the GATT/WTO on economic growth volatility," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 448-467.
    8. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "WTO membership, the membership duration and the utilization of non-reciprocal trade preferences offered by the QUAD Countries," EconStor Preprints 247265, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Żołądkiewicz Krystyna, 2011. "Some Deficiencies Within the WTO System," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 78-88, January.
    10. Mark Copelovitch & David Ohls, 2012. "Trade, institutions, and the timing of GATT/WTO accession in post-colonial states," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 81-107, March.
    11. Posh Raj Pandey & Ratnakar Adhikari & Swarnim Wagle, 2014. "Nepal's Accession to the World Trade Organization: Case Study of Issues Relevant to Least Developed Countries," CDP Background Papers 023, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:8:y:2009:i:02:p:279-314_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.