IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v17y2014i1p77-104..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consensus Yet Not Consented: A Critique of the WTO Decision-Making by Consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Wenwei Guan

Abstract

World Trade Organization’s consensus decision-making faces both practical and theoretical challenges. A major practical issue is that consensus involves deference to powers and problems of disenfranchisement; reverse consensus challenges the institutional check-and-balance against Appellate Body’s de facto judicial finality. Single undertaking, as a natural extension of consensus, creates consent fragmentation. A major theoretical issue is that the principle of consensus rests its legitimacy on a contractarian foundation. In the same way that ‘general will’ underlies the social compact, consensus and single undertaking underlie World Trade Organization (WTO) decision-making and build their legitimacy on members’ consent. Unfortunately, through contractarian justification’s reference to a static ‘original compact’ as the first mover, consensus decision-making fails to take into account the evolutionary nature of consent. Because decision-making by consensus fails to secure members’ consent and as a consequence single undertaking leads to a fragmentation of WTO’s ‘general will’, the WTO decision-making process loses its legitimacy. The article thus calls for a reconstruction of a decision-making mechanism that would embrace full membership consent for a true consensus.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenwei Guan, 2014. "Consensus Yet Not Consented: A Critique of the WTO Decision-Making by Consensus," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 77-104.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:77-104.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgu004
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. N. V. Ezechukwu, 2023. "Consumer Protection and Trade Governance: A Critical Partnership?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 191-221, June.

    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:oup:jieclw:v:17:y:2014:i:1:p:77-104.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.