Conclude Doha: it matters!

Hoekman, Bernard; Martín, Will; Mattoo, Aaditya

doi:10.1017/s1474745610000297

Cited by 23 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this respect, it will be crucial that the climate community does not duplicate the mistakes made by the world trade regime, and realizes that the full enforcement of the principles above takes care of this notion (Hoekman et al, 2010). The trade regime allows 'special and differentiated treatment' (SDT) for such countries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Messerlin

2012

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no doubt that trade and climate policies can be mutually destructive. But there are three strong reasons to suggest that they can also be mutually supportive: they have a common problem, common foes, and common friends. Mutual support would be much stronger if the world regimes for these two policies shared a few common principles. The climate community should feel at ease with the broad WTO principles of ‘national treatment’ and ‘most-favoured nation’, and rely on them in building its own treaty and institutions. The trade community should grasp the opportunity to benefit from the better disciplines on adjustment policies that it is hoped the climate community will design.These conclusions should put the many pending problems into a more positive perspective, and persuade negotiators to find pragmatic compromises, as was the case with the GATT. Using this perspective, the paper focuses on a few key issues, such as the definition of carbon border taxes and the reasons to ban carbon tariffs. Other cases of mutual support are examined. For instance, the climate community should not repeat the mistakes of the world trade regime in dealing with the developing and least developed countries.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Messerlin

2012

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hoekman, Martin, and Mattoo (2010) found that "applied" services policies (i.e., those currently in effect) are more liberal than the liberalization commitments made by WTO members in the GATS. In other words, countries provide more open access to their markets than they are willing to guarantee through multilateral trade obligations.…”

Section: Services Negotiations: Prospects Going Forwardmentioning

confidence: 96%

Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. Terms of use: Documents inADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use.By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term "country" in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. Note: In this publication, "$" refers to US dollars.The ADB Economics Working Paper Series is a forum for stimulating discussion and eliciting feedback on ongoing and recently completed research and policy studies undertaken by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) staff, consultants, or resource persons. The series deals with key economic and development problems, particularly those facing the Asia and Pacific region; as well as conceptual, analytical, or methodological issues relating to project/program economic analysis, and statistical data and measurement. The series aims to enhance the knowledge on Asia's development and policy challenges; strengthen analytical rigor and quality of ADB's country partnership strategies, and its subregional and country operations; and improve the quality and availability of statistical data and development indicators for monitoring development effectiveness.

show abstract

“…Hoekman, Martin, and Mattoo (2010) found that "applied" services policies (i.e., those currently in eff ect) are more liberal than the liberalization commitments made by WTO members in the GATS. In other words, countries provide more open access to their markets than they are willing to guarantee through multilateral trade obligations.…”

Section: Services Negotiations: Prospects Going Forwardmentioning

confidence: 98%

Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trade and investment in services are diffi cult to measure, and the regulatory barriers that inhibit the free fl ow of services are hard to quantify. As a result, very little attention has been paid to dismantling barriers to services trade and investment in free trade negotiations. Th is paper examines what has been achieved in both regional and multilateral compacts by surveying international precedents involving Asian countries which have included services trade reforms. We then assess the prospects for services trade negotiations and explore how services trade negotiations could be pursued over the next decade through two distinct channels: the Trans-Pacifi c Partnership (TPP) and a plurilateral approach among groups of WTO countries. We fi nd that in the case of developing Asia, free trade agreements have largely excluded services or have only committed to "lock in" current practices in a narrow subset of service sectors. Th is is also the case in agreements negotiated between developing countries, which have produced less substantial commitments to liberalize services than those negotiated between developing and developed countries. Multilateral negotiations on services have also underperformed, as substantive negotiations on services in the Doha Round never really got underway. We advocate a stronger eff ort by developing Asian countries to prioritize services negotiations in their regional arrangements, and to expand coverage of services in those pacts to a broad range of infrastructure services that are included in other FTAs in force or under construction in the Asia-Pacifi c region.JEL Codes: F10, F13, F14, F15, F23, F59, G28, H50, H70

show abstract

Conclude Doha: it matters!

Cited by 23 publications

References 39 publications

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Climate and trade policies: from mutual destruction to mutual support

Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations

Prospects for Services Trade Negotiations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About