The conclusion of the World Trade Organization's (WTO) ninth ministerial meeting-held in Bali 3-7 December 2013-is at one and the same time momentous, marginal, and business-as-usual. It is momentous because it marks the first multilateral agreement reached in the WTO since the organisation began operations on 1 January 1995; it is marginal because the deal reached will have only a limited impact on the global trading system; and it is business as usual because the Bali package will be of disproportionally greater value to the industrial states than to their developing and least developed counterparts. We examine what happened in Bali covering the principal issues at stake and the content of the outcome, what this means for the WTO and for the Doha Development Agenda (DDA), and why it all matters. We argue that while the Bali ministerial is significant and the agreements reached important, the conclusion of the meeting and the package agreed represents only a limited movement forward in addressing the fundamental problems and inequities of the WTO system.
A considerable and growing literature exists on social transfers in developing countries, that is, direct transfers in cash or kind to individuals or households in poverty. Many studies have examined the contribution social transfers can make to reducing poverty and vulnerability in the developing world, but less attention has been paid to how social transfers might affect growth. This Review examines the available evidence on the effects social transfers may be expected to have on growth at the micro-level. It identifies and assesses a number of pathways through which social transfers can potentially contribute either to enhancing or impeding growth. This paper argues that in assessing the growth impacts of social transfers it is important to focus on the poor and their circumstances. The discussion of the linkages between social transfers and growth in developed countries focuses on crosscountry empirical studies, testing the hypothesis that if social expenditures are harmful to growth performance then they will show a negative correlation with growth across a sample of countries.
This article offers a full-length evaluation of the World Trade Organization's (WTO) decisive December 2015 Nairobi ministerial conference. It examines the dynamics of the meeting, the emergence of a new negotiating mode, and the contestations between key developing and developed members; it explores the substance of the deal negotiated; and it reflects on the future capacity of the WTO to serve as a means of securing trade gains for developing and least developed countries. Three arguments are advanced. First, the use of a new mode of negotiating brought participation and consensus into the core of the Nairobi talks, but it also resulted in an agreement that moves away from the pursuit of universal agreements to one wherein more narrowly focused piecemeal deals can be brokered. Second, the package of trade measures agreed continues an established pattern of asymmetrical trade deals that favour developed members over their developing and least developed counterparts. Third, Nairobi alters fundamentally the likely shape of future WTO deals with significant consequences for developing country trade gains. The likely result is that while Nairobi will energise the multilateral system it will do so in a way that is of questionable value to developing and least developed countries.
Constructing multilateral rules to govern trade in agricultural goods has been notoriously difficult. What success there has been relied on linking liberalization in agriculture to broader deals involving multiple sectors through the principle of the single undertaking, but the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Nairobi ministerial conference of 2015 has abandoned that principle, shifting the multilateral trade system onto a new trajectory. Using the broad body of political economy theory, this article argues that there is now very little prospect that the WTO will be able to liberalize agricultural trade, with the consequence that the WTO will be unable to expand the trade opportunities of those countries that specialize in producing agricultural commodities. For this reason, the multilateral trade system looks increasingly ill-suited to the 1commercial needs of those low-income countries that are reliant on exporting agricultural goods and the promise of development through expanding trade based on comparative advantage is being tacitly pushed aside. This article argues that the abandonment of the single undertaking demands a deep reflection by WTO member states and other stakeholders on the underlying principles of the WTO, its future direction and how trade opportunities will be created for all within a system that has effectively abandoned further liberalization within agriculture.
In September 2010 world leaders will meet in New York to discuss progress in meeting the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which include the promise of halving 'extreme poverty' between 1990 and 2015. The paper begins with a brief history of how the MDGs came into being (See Table 1 for a list and other details), noting that they were primarily a product of the rich world, before looking at the progress made in achieving them and the degree to which the rich countries have lived up to the promises they made as part of Goal 8. The final section draws lessons from the MDG process to feed into the debate concerning what will take their place in 2015 when they come to an end.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.