Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:23:11.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

America, Europe, and the New Trade Order

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jeffrey J. Schott
Jeffrey J. Schott*
Affiliation:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the last 60 years, the multilateral management of trade through the GATT and subsequently through the WTO has been led by the United States and Europe. Since the turn of the new millennium, however, developing countries have increasingly used their leverage to insist that talks on agriculture receive priority attention, deny the inclusion of investment and competition policy on the negotiating agenda, and block agreement on negotiating modalities for agriculture and non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Cooperation between the United States and the European Union is still essential, but no longer sufficient, for successful multilateral negotiations. Specifically, the “BRICKs” (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Korea) are likely to be pivotal in directing the course and contributing to the success or failure of the WTO.

Keywords

trade policyBRICKSWTO negotiationsWTO reform
Type
Article
Information
Business and Politics , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , October 2009 , pp. 1 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © V.K. Aggarwal 2009 and published under exclusive license to Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrews, Edmund L. “US Won't Cite China Over Its Currency.” New York Times, 15 April 2009. Available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/business/global/16currency.html>. Accessed on 12 May 2009..+Accessed+on+12+May+2009.>Google Scholar
Atlantic Council of the United States. 2007. Transatlantic Leadership for a New Global Economy. Policy Paper, April. Washington, D.C.: The Atlantic Council of the United States.Google Scholar
Baldwin, Richard and Thorton, Phil. 2008. Multilateralising Regionalism: Ideas for a WTO Action Plan on Regionalism. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
Bergsten, C. Fred. 1996. Competitive Liberalization and Global Free Trade: A Vision of the Early 21st Century. APEC Working Paper No. 96–15. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Brunel, Claire and Hufbauer, Gary C. 2009. Money for the Auto Industry: Consistent With WTO Rules? Policy Brief 09–4, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C. Available at <http://www.iie.com/publications/interstitial.cfm?ResearchID=1124>. Accessed on 12 May 2009.Google Scholar
Evans, John W. 1971. The Kennedy Round in American Trade Policy: The Twilight of the GATT? Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Edward M. and Marchick, David M. 2006. US National Security and Foreign Direct Investment. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Hufbauer, Gary C. and Schott, Jeffrey J. 2009. Buy American: Bad for Jobs, Worse for Reputation. Policy Brief 09–2, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C. Available at <http://www.iie.com/publications/interstitial.cfm?ResearchID=1114>. Accessed on 12 May 2009.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund (IMF). 2008. World Economic Outlook. April. Washington, D.C.: IMF.Google Scholar
Schott, Jeffrey J. 2004. Free Trade Agreements: Boon or Bane of the World Trading System? In Free Trade Agreements: US Strategies and Priorities, edited by Schott, Jeffrey J. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Schott, Jeffrey J. 2008. Rational Expectations about the Doha Round Negotiations. Commentary posted on VoxEU.org, 17 July.Google Scholar
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). 2007. World Investment Report. Geneva: UNCTAD.Google Scholar
US Department of the Treasury, Office of International Affairs. 2009. Report to Congress on International Economic and Exchange Rate Policies. April 15. Available at <http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/reports/fxreportfinalfor%20webapril152009.pdf>. Accessed on 13 May 2009..+Accessed+on+13+May+2009.>Google Scholar
Watts, Jonathan. “China Considers Setting Targets for Carbon Emissions.” The Guardian, 19 April 2009. Available at <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/19/china-environment-kyoto>. Accessed on 12 May 2009.Google Scholar
Commission, Warwick. 2007. The Multilateral Trade Regime: Which Way Forward? The Report of the First Warwick Commission. Coventry: University of Warwick.Google Scholar
Winham, Gilbert R. 1986. International Trade and the Tokyo Round Negotiation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 2007. World Trade Report 2007. Six Decades of Multilateral Trade Cooperation: What Have We Learnt? Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar