{"title":"Doha dead and buried in Nairobi: lessons for the WTO","authors":"Antoine Martin, B. Mercurio","doi":"10.1108/JITLP-01-2017-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nThis paper aims to reflect on the outcomes of the Nairobi Ministerial Conference of 2015, which, for all intents and purposes, put the Doha Round to rest and analyses the policy implications and lessons for policymaking at the World Trade Organization (WTO), most importantly the abandonment of the “single undertaking” and return to plurilateral agreements. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nThe paper approaches the issue of WTO policymaking by analysing the various outputs produced both before and because of the Ministerial Conference. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nThe paper suggests that the Nairobi Ministerial has finally put an end to the Doha Round and comes to the conclusion that policymaking at the multilateral level (i.e. through the single undertaking) will change significantly in the future because the WTO Members are incapable of reaching a comprehensive agreement at this time. Instead, the current trend towards trade policymaking via FTA is likely to continue while the WTO focuses on plurilateral negotiations on narrow and discreet issues. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nThe paper contributes to the literature on the analysis of global regulatory fragmentation and on trade policymaking. It draws attention, in particular, to the consequences of the last Ministerial Conference and highlights prospects for the future of global trade regulation.","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":"16 1","pages":"49-66"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-01-2017-0001","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-01-2017-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to reflect on the outcomes of the Nairobi Ministerial Conference of 2015, which, for all intents and purposes, put the Doha Round to rest and analyses the policy implications and lessons for policymaking at the World Trade Organization (WTO), most importantly the abandonment of the “single undertaking” and return to plurilateral agreements.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper approaches the issue of WTO policymaking by analysing the various outputs produced both before and because of the Ministerial Conference.
Findings
The paper suggests that the Nairobi Ministerial has finally put an end to the Doha Round and comes to the conclusion that policymaking at the multilateral level (i.e. through the single undertaking) will change significantly in the future because the WTO Members are incapable of reaching a comprehensive agreement at this time. Instead, the current trend towards trade policymaking via FTA is likely to continue while the WTO focuses on plurilateral negotiations on narrow and discreet issues.
Originality/value
The paper contributes to the literature on the analysis of global regulatory fragmentation and on trade policymaking. It draws attention, in particular, to the consequences of the last Ministerial Conference and highlights prospects for the future of global trade regulation.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of International Trade Law and Policy is a peer reviewed interdisciplinary journal with a focus upon the nexus of international economic policy and international economic law. It is receptive, but not limited, to the methods of economics, law, and the social sciences. As scholars tend to read individual articles of particular interest to them, rather than an entire issue, authors are not required to write with full accessibility to readers from all disciplines within the purview of the Journal. However, interdisciplinary communication should be fostered where possible. Thus economists can utilize quantitative methods (including econometrics and statistics), while legal scholars and political scientists can invoke specialized techniques and theories. Appendices are encouraged for more technical material. Submissions should contribute to understanding international economic policy and the institutional/legal architecture in which it is implemented. Submissions can be conceptual (theoretical) and/or empirical and/or doctrinal in content. Topics of interest to the Journal are expected to evolve over time but include: -All aspects of international trade law and policy -All aspects of international investment law and policy -All aspects of international development law and policy -All aspects of international financial law and policy -Relationship between economic policy and law and other societal concerns, including the human rights, environment, health, development, and national security