IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/adbiwp/0478.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preferentialism in Trade Relations: Challenges for the World Trade Organization

Author

Listed:
  • Low, Patrick

    (Asian Development Bank Institute)

Abstract

This paper argues that preferential trade agreements (PTAs) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) are not substitutes, and while PTAs are without doubt here to stay, dispensing with a multilateral venue for doing business in trade matters is not a serious option. It is therefore necessary to seek out better accommodation between PTAs and the WTO than has been apparent to date. The law of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/WTO has systematically fallen short in imposing discipline on discriminatory reciprocal trade agreements, while procedural requirements, such as notifications, have been partially observed at best, and dispute settlement findings have tended to reinforce existing weaknesses in the disciplines. One approach to remedying this situation is to explore a different kind of cooperation—that of soft law. A soft law approach to improving coherence and compatibility between the WTO and PTAs may hold some promise, but the option also has its pitfalls.

Suggested Citation

  • Low, Patrick, 2014. "Preferentialism in Trade Relations: Challenges for the World Trade Organization," ADBI Working Papers 478, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:adbiwp:0478
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.adbi.org/files/2014.05.07.wp478.preferentialism.trade.relations.wto.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fiorentino, Roberto V. & Verdeja, Luis & Toqueboeuf, Christelle, 2007. "The changing landscape of regional trade agreements: 2006 Update," WTO Discussion Papers 12, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    2. Anne O. Krueger, 1993. "Free Trade Agreements as Protectionist Devices: Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 4352, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Richard E. Baldwin, 2011. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocks on the Path to Global Free Trade," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    5. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2001. "Economic and legal aspects of the Most-Favored-Nation clause," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 233-279, June.
    6. Antoni Estevadeordal & Kati Suominen & Jeremy Harris & Matthew Shearer, 2009. "Bridging Regional Trade Agreements in the Americas: Special Report on Integration and Trade," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 20098, February.
    7. Roy, Martin & Marchetti, Juan & Lim, Hoe, 2007. "Services liberalization in the new generation of preferential trade agreements (PTAs): how much further than the GATS?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 155-192, July.
    8. Richard E. Baldwin, 2006. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocs on the Path to Global Free Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(11), pages 1451-1518, November.
    9. Antoni Estevadeordal & Caroline Freund & Emanuel Ornelas, 2008. "Does Regionalism Affect Trade Liberalization Toward Nonmembers?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1531-1575.
    10. Ornelas, Emanuel, 2008. "Feasible multilateralism and the effects of regionalism," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 202-224, January.
    11. Srinivasan, T. N., 2005. "Nondiscrimination in GATT/WTO: was there anything to begin with and is there anything left?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 69-95, March.
    12. Cadot, Olivier & Carrere, Celine & De Melo, Jaime & Tumurchudur, Bolormaa, 2006. "Product-specific rules of origin in EU and US preferential trading arrangements: an assessment," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 199-224, July.
    13. Bhagwati, Jagdish, 2008. "Termites in the Trading System: How Preferential Agreements Undermine Free Trade," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195331653.
    14. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2009. "Estimating the effects of free trade agreements on international trade flows using matching econometrics," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 63-76, February.
    15. Michael G. Plummer, 2007. "‘Best Practices’ in Regional Trading Agreements: An Application to Asia," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(12), pages 1771-1796, December.
    16. repec:idb:brikps:20098 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Kemp, Murray C. & Wan, Henry Jr., 1976. "An elementary proposition concerning the formation of customs unions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 95-97, February.
    18. Bhagwati, Jagdish & Greenaway, David & Panagariya, Arvind, 1998. "Trading Preferentially: Theory and Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(449), pages 1128-1148, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pushkar Pushp & Arbuda Sharma & Faisal Ahmed, 2024. "Flexibility in the WTO: Navigating the Dynamics of Multilateralism Using Grounded Theory," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 25(4), pages 805-823, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Vines & Monika Mrazova, 2008. "Is the WTO's Article XXIV Bad?," Economics Series Working Papers 417, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    2. Zakaria Sorgho, 2016. "RTAs' Proliferation and Trade-diversion Effects: Evidence of the ‘Spaghetti Bowl’ Phenomenon," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 285-300, February.
    3. Sorgho, Zakaria, 2014. "RTAs’ Proliferation and Trade-diversion effects: Evidence of the “Spaghetti Bowl” Phenomenon," MPRA Paper 60503, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Sorgho, Zakaria, 2015. "RTAs' Proliferation and Trade-Diversion Effects: Evidence of the "Spaghetti Bowl" Phenomenon," Working Papers 206223, University of Laval, Center for Research on the Economics of the Environment, Agri-food, Transports and Energy (CREATE).
    5. CALISKAN, Ozgur, 2011. "Eski ve Yeni Bölgeselleşme Olguları: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz [Old and New Regionalism: A Comparative Analysis]," MPRA Paper 56611, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Ornelas, Emanuel, 2012. "Preferential trade agreements and the labor market," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121752, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Mrázová, Monika & Vines, David & Zissimos, Ben, 2013. "Is the GATT/WTO's Article XXIV bad?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 216-232.
    8. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2011. "Measuring preferential market access," MPRA Paper 38565, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Kawai, Masahiro & Wignaraja, Ganeshan, 2011. "Asian FTAs: Trends, prospects and challenges," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-22, February.
    10. Masahiro Kawai, 2009. "The Asian “Noodle Bowl”:Is It Serious for Business?," Working Papers id:1936, eSocialSciences.
    11. repec:ilo:ilowps:469183 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Matthew Shearer & Kati Suominen & Antoni Estevadeordal, 2009. "Multilateralising RTAs in the Americas: State of Play and Ways Forward," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9300, Inter-American Development Bank.
    13. Innwon Park & Soonchan Park, 2011. "Best practices for regional trade agreements," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(2), pages 249-268, June.
    14. Shearer, Matthew & Suominen, Kati & Estevadeordal, Antoni, 2009. "Multilateralising RTAs in the Americas: State of Play and Ways Forward," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2522, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Rachel McCulloch, 2010. "The International Trading System and Its Future," Working Papers 08, Brandeis University, Department of Economics and International Business School.
    16. Pierre-Louis Vézina, 2014. "Race-to-the-bottom Tariff Cutting," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 444-458, August.
    17. Feuerstein Switgard, 2013. "From the Zollverein to the Economics of Regionalism," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 233(3), pages 367-388, June.
    18. Claes G. Alvstam & Erja Kettunen & Patrik Ström, 2017. "The service sector in the free-trade agreement between the EU and Singapore: closing the gap between policy and business realities," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 75-105, March.
    19. Ali Arbia, 2013. "Templates for Trade: Change, Persistence and Path Dependence in U. S. and EU Preferential Trade Agreements," KFG Working Papers p0051, Free University Berlin.
    20. Ganeshan Wignaraja, 2013. "Regional Trade Agreements and Enterprises in Southeast Asia," Trade Working Papers 23718, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    21. Cadot, Olivier & de Melo, Jaime & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2001. "Can bilateralism ease the pains of multilateral trade liberalization?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-44, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    World Trade Organization; Preferential Trade Agreements; coherence; soft law; trade dispute settlement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F50 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - General
    • F60 - International Economics - - Economic Impacts of Globalization - - - General
    • K30 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ris:adbiwp:0478. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ADB Institute (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/adbinjp.html .

    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.