Differential treatment for developing countries in the WTO: the unmaking of the North–South distinction in a multipolar world

Weinhardt, Clara; Schöfer, Till

doi:10.1080/01436597.2021.1992271

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, in the context of international climate change and trade laws, Pauwelyn (2013) concludes that the trend has shifted to individualisation of differential treatment, that is, differential treatment is based on individual circumstances. Weinhardt and Schöfer (2022) contradict the findings of Pauwelyn. They conclude that in the specific case of the WTO, law the traditional North–South division is being replaced by fragmentation among developing countries (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022).…”

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Weinhardt and Schöfer (2022) contradict the findings of Pauwelyn. They conclude that in the specific case of the WTO, law the traditional North–South division is being replaced by fragmentation among developing countries (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022). In this case, multiple vulnerable groups like the LDCs, small island vulnerable economies, low-income countries in transition, etc., compete with developing countries for getting special and differential treatment within the WTO (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022, p. 86).…”

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…They conclude that in the specific case of the WTO, law the traditional North–South division is being replaced by fragmentation among developing countries (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022). In this case, multiple vulnerable groups like the LDCs, small island vulnerable economies, low-income countries in transition, etc., compete with developing countries for getting special and differential treatment within the WTO (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022, p. 86). This has resulted in the phasing out of Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) for emerging powers as well as a significant number of other developing countries (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022, p. 88).…”

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accordingly, an unravelling of the North-South divide in international law-making forums does not bode well for the leadership aspirations of emerging powers. Further, it could also lead to competition between various sub-groups of developing countries for preferential treatment (Weinhardt & Schöfer, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Emerging Powers and Small Island Developing States: Leadership or Co-Option?

din

2023

India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in climate change-related negotiations indicate that there are emerging conflicts of interest between Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and emerging powers like India and China. Emerging powers have to address their developmental concerns while pursuing aspirations related to leadership in global governance. To take a leadership role in global governance structures relating to climate change, emerging powers need to pursue their interests while accommodating the concerns of their potential followers, which include SIDS. Increased conflict of interests between emerging powers and other sets of vulnerable countries could lead to adverse implications for the North–South divide in international environmental relations, which in turn will impact their leadership aspirations. Using the example of leadership in international relations and the statements made by the SIDS at COP26, this article concludes that the existing situation presents a challenge as well as an opportunity for emerging powers like India to take a leadership role in a reformed new world order.

show abstract

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: The New Dynamics As Leadership Challenges and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Emerging Powers and Small Island Developing States: Leadership or Co-Option?

din

2023

India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Its status in international politics remains unclear, as its representatives and observers have variously positioned it as a middle power, an emerging economy, a member of the West, or a developing country (Carranza, 2017; Milani et al, 2017; Burges, 2020; Esteves et al, 2020). Moreover, determining Brazil's position in global politics is complicated by the increased economic heterogeneity and political divergence of the developing country group over the past decade (Weinhardt and Schöfer, 2021). This in turn has major implications for Brazil's trade strategy and for its role in ongoing World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Developing Country Leader to Flexible Negotiator: New Directions in Brazilian Trade Strategy

Schöfer

2023

World Trade Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brazil has changed its negotiation strategy in World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations. In the first half of the WTO era (1995–), Brazil adopted a strong developing country leadership role as coordinator and spokesperson of the G20 group of developing countries. More recently, however, this group has disappeared from the negotiation scene. This article examines how Brazil has departed from a 2000 status quo and arrived at a more flexible approach, less reliant on the industrialized-developing divide as a structuring principle of its diplomacy. Using WTO negotiation documents, trade delegate interviews, dispute settlement case law, and secondary literature, I outline the contours of new directions in Brazilian trade policy. These include joint legislative initiatives with the EU, a move towards the plurilateral level on non-traditional issues, a greater heterogeneity of dispute settlement targets, and a newly flexible handling of its rights under the WTO's special and differential treatment status. The article contributes to ongoing debates on Brazil's status in international affairs, its reliance on large coalitions, and the maintenance of followership as key directives of its foreign policy, and scholarship that sees Brazil as stuck in a ‘graduation dilemma’.

show abstract

Country differentiation in the global environmental context: Who is ‘developing’ and according to what?

Farias¹

2023

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several multilateral treaties and International Governmental Organizations have introduced different legal obligations for countries based on the developing/developed (or equivalent) dichotomy. Such differentiation can (re)produce a range of material and symbolic consequences for those labelled developing or developed. Much has been researched about this topic in the environmental regime yet an important gap remains: what does this differentiation look like empirically? This article answers this question through a qualitative analysis that compares about two dozen multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) on (1) how they specify what makes a country be developing (or not) and (2) the result of this choice, that is, exactly which countries are labelled developing under each MEA. The research reveals at least four important points: (1) the absence of any converging approach to classifying countries in the global environmental context; (2) almost 1 out of 4 countries in the world have mixed classification (developing or developed depending on the MEA); (3) ‘switching’ groups is relatively infrequent, but can be both moving to or away from the developing label; and (4) most countries with mixed classifications appear to be comfortable in the situation. This research contributes to a finer-grained understanding of differentiation in global environmental governance.

show abstract

Differential treatment for developing countries in the WTO: the unmaking of the North–South distinction in a multipolar world

Cited by 14 publications

References 31 publications

Emerging Powers and Small Island Developing States: Leadership or Co-Option?

Emerging Powers and Small Island Developing States: Leadership or Co-Option?

From Developing Country Leader to Flexible Negotiator: New Directions in Brazilian Trade Strategy

Country differentiation in the global environmental context: Who is ‘developing’ and according to what?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About