Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Full Access Domestic-Level Factors and Negotiation (In)Flexibility in the WTO

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Domestic-Level Factors and Negotiation (In)Flexibility in the WTO

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of International Negotiation

Abstract Some suggest that the fault lines of the WTO’s perceived failures actually lie in failures at the domestic level. This study examines the factors that can explain flexibility (and inflexibility) in multilateral trade negotiations within WTO member states. To shed light on the role of domestic factors in influencing WTO positions, we examine one member state in connection with a high-level meeting. India at the July 2008 Ministerial is selected primarily for methodological reasons. The empirical analysis provides preliminary support for the proposition that domestic policy-making structures marked by continuous information exchange and coordination are more likely to yield negotiation flexibility in multilateral talks. More specifically, the intense interaction that marks the relationships between actors involved in policy making on Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) and services, where the Indian negotiation position was flexible overall, stands in contrast to what took place in the area of agriculture, where India took a manifestly inflexible stand. Competing explanations fail to fully account for the variation in these negotiating postures. A key insight from the analysis is that organized and regularized consultations, involving the same actors over time, are important. There is also a need for public outreach strategies in connection with high-level WTO meetings.

Affiliations: 1: Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University Box 514, SE 751 20, Uppsala Sweden Jannie.Lilja@pcr.uu.se

10.1163/157180612X630956
/content/journals/10.1163/157180612x630956
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading

Abstract Some suggest that the fault lines of the WTO’s perceived failures actually lie in failures at the domestic level. This study examines the factors that can explain flexibility (and inflexibility) in multilateral trade negotiations within WTO member states. To shed light on the role of domestic factors in influencing WTO positions, we examine one member state in connection with a high-level meeting. India at the July 2008 Ministerial is selected primarily for methodological reasons. The empirical analysis provides preliminary support for the proposition that domestic policy-making structures marked by continuous information exchange and coordination are more likely to yield negotiation flexibility in multilateral talks. More specifically, the intense interaction that marks the relationships between actors involved in policy making on Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) and services, where the Indian negotiation position was flexible overall, stands in contrast to what took place in the area of agriculture, where India took a manifestly inflexible stand. Competing explanations fail to fully account for the variation in these negotiating postures. A key insight from the analysis is that organized and regularized consultations, involving the same actors over time, are important. There is also a need for public outreach strategies in connection with high-level WTO meetings.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/15718069/17/1/15718069_017_01_S06_text.html;jsessionid=lHgj9zmEHY-2NCmWhWmUlm5N.x-brill-live-03?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/157180612x630956&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/157180612x630956
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Ahnlid Anders Stewart Terence "“The European Union, Leadership and Next Steps in the Multilateral Trading System”" Opportunities and Obligations 2009 Alphen aan den Rijn Kluwer Law International 3 26
2. Albin Cecilia Justice and Fairness in International Negotiations 2001 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
3. Allport G.W. The Nature of Prejudice 1954 Cambridge, MA Perseus Books
4. Amir Yehuda "“Contact Hypothesis in Ethnic Relations”" Psychological Bulletin 1969 Vol 71 5 319 342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0027352
5. Bellemann Christophe , Gerster Richard "“Accountability in the World Trade Organization”" Journal of World Trade 1996 Vol 30 6 31 74
6. Blustein Paul Misadventures of the Most Favored Nations: Clashing Egos, Inflated Ambitions, and the Great Shambles of the World Trade System 2009 New York PublicAffairs
7. Bridges Daily Update "“WTO Mini-Ministerial Evades Collapse”" 2008a July 26 Issue 6
8. Bridges Daily Update "“WTO Mini-Ministerial Ends in Collapse”" WTO Mini-Ministerial Geneva 2008b July 30 Issue 10
9. Capling Ann , Low Patrick Capling Ann , Low Patrick "“The domestic politics of trade-policy making,”" Governments, Non-State Actors and Trade Policy-Making 2010 Cambridge Cambridge University Press 4 28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511687082.003
10. Checkel Jeffrey T. "“Why comply?”" International Organization 2001 Vol 55 3 553 588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/00208180152507551
11. Checkel Jeffrey T. "“Bridging the Rational-Choice/Constructivist Gap?”" ARENA Working Papers 00/11 2000
12. Dhar Biswajit , Kallummal Murali Halle Mark , Wolfe Robert "“Trade policy off the hook,”" Process Matters 2007 Manitoba International Institute for Sustainable Development 183 238
13. Druckman Daniel "“Situational Levers of Position Change”" American Academy of Political and Social Science Annals 1995 November Vol 542 61 80 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716295542001005
14. Druckman Daniel Doing Research 2005 London Sage Publications
15. Druckman Daniel , Mitchell Christopher "“Preface”" American Academy of Political and Social Science Annals 1995a November Vol 542 8 9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716295542001001
16. Druckman Daniel "“Flexibility: Nature, Sources, and Effects”" American Academy of Political and Social Science Annals 1995b November Vol 542 213 218 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716295542001014
17. George Alexander L , Bennett Andrew Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences 2005 Cambridge MIT Press
18. Government of India "“Statement of Shri Kamal Nath”" Trade Negotiation Committee Meeting 2008 July 25 2008
19. Granovetter Mark "“Economic Action and Social Structure”" American Journal of Sociology 1985 Vol 91 3 481 510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228311
20. Hopmann Terrence "“Two Paradigms of Negotiation”" Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 1995 Vol 542 24 47 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002716295542001003
21. Huckfeldt Robert R. , Sprague John "“Political Parties and Electoral Mobilization”" The American Political Science Review 1992 Vol 86 1 70 86 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1964016
22. Hurrell Andrew , Narlikar Amrita "“A New Politics of Confrontation?”" 2005 London Development Studies Institute
23. Joerges Christian , Neyer Juergen "“Transforming Strategic Interaction into Deliberative Problem-Solving”" Journal of European Public Policy 1997 Vol 4 4 609 625 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135017697344091
24. Jones Kent "“Green Room Politics and the WTO’s Crisis of Representation”" Progress in Development Studies 2009 Vol 9 4 349 357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/146499340900900408
25. Kanth Ravi D. "“India tells WTO: Resolve issues before ministerial”" Business Standard 2008 July 07
26. Kumar Rajiv , Nair Swapna "“India: Strategies and the Doha Development Agenda”" Working paper, WTO Forum 2009 Geneva 28 September 2009
27. Milner Helen Interests, Institutions and Information 1997 Princeton Princeton University Press
28. Montemayor Raul "“How Will the May 2008 “Modalities” Text Affect Access to the Special Safeguard Mechanism, and the Effectiveness of Additional Safeguard Duties”" 2008 Issue paper 15 ICTSD Agricultural Trade and Sustainable Development Series Available at:
29. Narlikar Amrita International Trade and Developing Countries 2003 London Routledge
30. Narlikar Amrita , Tussie Diana 2004 The G20 at the Cancun Ministerial
31. Narlikar Amrita , Wickers Brendan Leadership and change in the multilateral trading system 2010 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
32. Nordström Håkan "“ Participation of Developing Countries in the WTO”" 2005 (ISBN-13: 9780521862769)
33. Odell John "“Introduction”" Negotiating Trade 2006 Cambridge Cambridge University Press http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491610
34. Odell John , Ortiz Mena Antonio L.N "“How to Negotiate over Trade”" 2004 February
35. Ostry Sylvia "“External Transparency”" 2002a WTO Advisory Group. April 2002
36. Ostry Sylvia "“The Trade Policy Making Process Level One of the Two Level Game”" 2002b IDB Intal Occasional Paper 13, Buenos Aires
37. Patton Bruce Building Relationships and the Bottom Line 2004 Harvard Harvard University Press
38. Priyadarshi Shishir Gallagher Peter , Low Patrick , Stoler Andrew "“Decision Making Processes in India”" Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation 2005 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
39. Putnam Robert D. "“Diplomacy and Domestic Politics”" International Organization 1988 Vol 42 3 427 460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027697
40. Rao Aditya "“Has India Hit Industrial Recession?”" The India Street 2008 October 14
41. Ray Amit Shovon , Saha Sabyasachi Narlikar Amrita , Vickers Brendan "“Shifting Coordinates of India’s Stance at the WTO”" Leadership and Change in the Multilateral Trading System 2008 Leiden Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
42. Rediff "“India rejects proposals to limit farm subsidy”" 2008 July 21, 2008
43. Sapra Seema "“The WTO System of Trade Governance”" Oregon Review of International Law 2009 Vol 11 2 71 108
44. Scholz John , Berardo Ramiro , Kile Brad "“Do Networks Solve Collective Action Problems?”" The Journal of Politics 2008 Vol 70 2 393 406 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608080389
45. Sen Julius "“Lessons Not Learned”" Working Paper, Globalization and Poverty 2003 August
46. Shaffer Gregory "“The World Trade Organization under Challenge”" The Harvard Environmental Law Review 2001 Vol 25 1 1 93
47. Shiraz Mehnaz , Saleem Muhammad Anum "“Trade Policy Consultative Mechanism in Pakistan”" 2006 International Trade Centre. UNCTAD/WTO. EC Trade Related Technical Assistance Programme for Pakistan. Project PAK 75/17C
48. Siegel David A. "“Social Networks and Collective Action”" American Journal of Political Science 2009 Vol 53 1 122 138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00361.x
49. Uzzi Brian "“Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks”" Administrative Science Quarterly 1997 Vol 42 35 67 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393808
50. Wolfe Robert "“Sprinting during a Marathon: Why the WTO Ministerial failed in July 2008”" Working Paper Sciences Po 2009
51. Wolfe Robert , Helmer Jesse Halle Mark , Wolfe Robert "“Trade policy begins at home”" Process Matters: Sustainable Development and Domestic Trade Transparency 2007
52. WTO "“Day 9: Talks collapse despite progress on a list of issue”" WTO News DDA July 2008 Package: Summary 29 July 2008
53. Zahrnt Valentin "“Domestic constituents and the formulation of the WTO negotiating positions”" World Trade Review 2008 Vol 7 2 393 421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1474745608003820
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/157180612x630956
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/157180612x630956
2012-01-01
2016-12-03

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation