Trade Development Symposium

his plenary session will consider how we can strengthen the WTO, as an institution, and thereby help renew the multilateral trading system.

There has been much debate over the years about possible reforms. Good and thoughtful ideas have been offered, from a variety of different sources. Yet, things remain as they are, and changes continue to be resisted.

ICTSD starts from the premise that the WTO is a valuable and indispensable multilateral institution. The international community has built both the GATT and WTO. However, after an eighty year history of building open trade and its accompanying institutions, we now face the challenge of protecting and promoting this inheritance.

This includes further nurturing and strengthening the WTO, so that it can better reflect the different political and economic times we live in, address the sustainable development challenges we face, and support the new aspirations of a new era and generation.

Some obvious questions to be raised and discussed:

• Why is reform resisted?
• Who benefits from the status quo?
• How can things be moved forward on this front?
• Who are the key actors in fostering this change?
• What kind of process is required?
• What are some of the fundamental changes that the trading system should be most concerned with?
• Would these discussions disrupt the DDA negotiations, and other items of the WTO agenda? Or, is it compatible with and complementary to, facilitating its agenda?
• What is the price of not changing and not adapting to the new times we live in?
• Where is the public on all of this?

This plenary session will look at concerns regarding competitiveness and carbon leakage related to climate change mitigation in order to understand how these concerns can be related to international trade. The discussions will touch upon border carbon adjustment measures while also exploring other options that exist to deal with concerns of competitiveness and carbon leakage. How do these options relate to trade, in particular the trade of developing countries? How can countries avoid creating new barriers to trade when attempting to deal with climate change?

Speakers and open discussions will touch upon the following issues:

• Empirical evidence shows little proof for carbon leakage. How serious is the risk for significant levels of carbon leakage arising from future climate change regulation?
• The most efficient way of avoiding carbon leakage and losses in competitiveness is probably to conclude a broad, global deal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. How can this be achieved?
• Some restructuring of production and trade at the global level will be necessary in order to reduce carbon emissions; production of energy- and emission-intensive goods needs to take place where there is access to clean, renewable energy. How can this be achieved, as governments try to preserve the competitive position of their industries and shield them from the effects of climate change regulation through for instance free allocation and border measures?
• Some claim that border measures are unavoidable. If they are introduced, what measures should be taken by the countries imposing them to avoid adverse effects on the trade and development of poor countries?
• If climate change is to be stopped, it is not enough that industrial countries, or Annex I-countries under the Kyoto protocol, stop emitting, more countries need to contribute. What is fair to ask from developing countries? How should they be assisted to be able to contribute?

Is leaving the DDA in abeyance and the WTO in isolation the best policy strategy in the current economic environment? Isn’t one of the central lessons of the recent financial and economic crisis that multilateral cooperation and responsive international institutions and regulatory settings, are central to economic recovery and future stability? In this context, this session will debate the relevance and importance of bringing early closure to the DDA.

With macroeconomic policy responses to the crisis now exhausted for many countries, and unemployment continuing to rise, it is worth considering whether there will be increased pressure to resort to non-market interventions.. The multilateral trading system is as much about establishing the rules, regulation, and predictability of engagement in international commerce (notably to protect the interests of the poorest countries), thereby providing an enabling global trading environment, as it is about market access. Have policy makers lost sight of this?

The trade agenda has changed and is changing, particularly in its relation to climate change, energy, food security and labour standards. Can these pressing and important issues be addressed without concluding the DDA?

• Systemic Responses to Crisis-Era Protectionism (ppt - 292kb)
• Closing Doha with or Without a Deal (ppt - 427kb)
• Protectionism and the Crisis: Some Good News (pdf - 162kb)
• Doha and the Global Crisis (pdf - 212kb)

In summer 2009 the Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment (TRADE) Act was re-introduced for the 2009 US Congressional session with 106 original cosponsors. The TRADE Act outlines a way forward to a new trade and globalization agenda and is supported by a broad array of labor, consumer, environmental, family farm and faith groups. It requires a review of existing trade pacts, including the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO) and other major pacts, as well as setting forth what must and must not be included in future trade pacts. It also provides for the renegotiation of existing trade agreements and describes the key elements of a new trade negotiating and approval mechanism to replace ‘Fast Track’. The session will inform about the TRADE Act and discuss its international implications. It will also discuss the question, in how far the TRADE Act can be an inspiration for like-minded initiatives in other parts of the world.

Presentation: Lori Wallach (Public Citizen): What’s the TRADE Act about?

Comments/Reactions:

• Jeff Vogt (AFL-CIO): Why US trade unions support the TRADE Act
• Marieke Koning (International Trade Union Confederation/ITUC): Decent Work, Decent Life for Women
• Ben Moxham (Trade Union Congress/TUC, UK): Would a TRADE Act-initiative also be a good idea for Europe?

Regional trade agreements (RTAs) are a systemic issue in the Doha negotiations. Covering some half of world trade, RTAs have significant implications in the global trading system. But the proliferation of RTAs around the world has also created a veritable “spaghetti bowl” of multiple and often overlapping agreements. The various disciplines included in each RTA—such as tariff liberalization schedules, rules of origin (RoO), standards, safeguards, and investment rules—entangle the bowl further. The seemingly incessant proliferation of overlapping, complex RTAs entails a number of risks.

First, the proliferation of RTAs can “balkanize” regional and global trading systems. If the various agreements carry widely distinct features, they can impose undue transaction costs for traders, investors, and governments operating in several RTA markets simultaneously. Second, the spread of RTAs risks the rise of hub-and-spoke systems centered on a few hub countries in which the potential cost savings from cumulation of production among the spokes remain untapped. Third, the proliferation of RTAs means that although any given country will likely be an insider to a growing number of RTAs, it will also be an outsider to an even larger set of RTAs. Even the most prolific integrator countries can thus end up facing some degree of discrimination and/or preference erosion in a growing number of RTA markets.

One policy option for pre-empting these problems would be to build bridges among the existing RTAs—strive to achieve some form of convergence or gradual harmonization of the various RTAs in the Americas, Asia-Pacific, and so on, and to implement cumulation of production among them. Another, perhaps more distant option, is to “multilateralize” RTAs. This session focuses on these policy options, including presenting a recent IDB study Bridging Regional Trade Agreements in the Americas, which examines the prospects for convergence of RTAs in the Americas.

• Geneva Trade & Development Symposium “Convergence of Free Trade Agreements” (ppt - 923kb)
• Convergence of Free Trade Agreements: The Asia-Pacific Region (file - 107kb)

In addition to reviewing the latest information* on the nature, extent, and harm done by protectionism since the beginning of the global economic downturn, this panel will consider the systemic implications of contemporary protectionism for the work programmes of the WTO, OECD, and G20. Implications for national trade strategies and strategies towards regional trade agreements will also be considered.

Participants in the panel:

Mr John Miller, Wall Street Journal, Chair.
Professor Simon J. Evenett, University of St. Gallen.
Dr. Lucian Cernat, DG Trade, European Commission.
Professor Frederic Jenny, Chairman, OECD Committee.
Professor Vera Thorstensen, Brazilian Mission.
Mr. Henrik Isakson, Swedish Board of Trade.

Suggestions for organisation of the panel:

Introductory remarks by the chair: 5 minutes.
Presentation by each speaker: no more than 10 minutes.
Questions and Answers: remaining time.

*From the Global Trade Alert (www.globaltradealert.org), the European Commission, and other pertinent reports that are made public before the panel meets.

• Crisis-Era Protectionism One Year After The Washington G20 Meeting: A GTA Update, Some New Analysis, and a Few Words of Caution (pdf - 238kb)
• Analyses of Crisis-Era Protectionism: Perspectives of the GTA Team (pdf - 1760kb)

Enhancing the transfer and diffusion of clean energy technologies is critical to reduce CO2 emissions. In this regard, the role of patents in the creation and transfer of clean energy technologies to address climate change has been hotly debated in the lead up to the 15th UNFCCC Conference in Copenhagen (COP-15). Although there has been increased research and analysis in this field, there still remains a lack of empirical data to form the basis for informed and objective decision-making.

To help bridge the gap between evidence and policy in this area, UNEP, the EPO and ICTSD are undertaking a joint study with a view to develop a methodology that would provide a solid platform for analyzing the role of patents in the development and dissemination of clean energy technologies.

The study involves several phases: a mapping of selected energy generation technologies with a potential of reducing GHG, a patent landscape based on the technology mapping and a survey of licensing practices in relation to clean energy technologies.

During the session, the study and some if its preliminary findings will be presented.

• A First Glance at the Methodology and Findings (ppt - 331kb)
• Patents and Clean Energy: Bridging the Gap Between Evidence and Policy (file - 2703kb)

Many countries are adopting market-based instruments to promote sustainable development of a low-carbon economy, and to reduce climate change emissions. What are the trade and investment law implications? How can WTO and regional trade rules better support the effective and appropriate use of these instruments? This experts panel and participatory dialogue briefs WTO Ministerial participants on recent legal research and practice in new carbon trading systems and domestic carbon pricing measures, and on how economic instruments could better promote the adoption and transfer of clean energy technology. Hosted by Centre for International Sustainable Development Law (CISDL), in partnership with the law faculties of several leading universities, with support from Sustainable Prosperity and the Hong Kong Climate Change Business Forum, the event provides an opportunity to help define the emerging trade and investment law research agenda for Copenhagen and beyond.

Chair & Keynote: Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger, Senior Director, Sustainable Prosperity & Director, CISDL

Prof. Markus W Gehring, Professeur agregee, University of Ottawa & Lecturer, Cambridge University

Prof. Kate Miles, Professor, Sydney University Law Faculty & Legal Research Fellow, CISDL

Me. Verki M Tunteng, Legal Research Fellow, CISDL

Christopher Tung, Principal, Hong Kong Climate Change Business Forum*

The purpose of this plenary session is to look beyond the current Doha round and to consider the longer-term role and functions of the World Trade Organization and its place in the global economic system. Rather than analyze the current state of or prospects for the negotiations, or to rehearse already known national positions, the session will focus on the fundamental challenges confronting the WTO, to try to suggest what its future mission should be and to consider how it can be made to operate better.

The starting point for the discussion will be that the chequered history of the Doha round raises serious systemic questions about the effectiveness and relevance of the WTO, other than in adjudicating in trade disputes. Panellists will identify the main reasons why decisions have been so hard to reach and consensus difficult to forge. They will then propose practical solutions for defining the WTO’s role and improving its machinery.

The following themes are illustrative of those likely to be touched upon:

• What main lessons should be drawn from the history of the Doha round about the WTO’s weaknesses and shortcomings?
• Have trade rounds outlived their usefulness? If so, what should replace them? If not, how should they be structured so as to achieve results more efficiently?
• Should the WTO concentrate as heavily in future on achieving market-opening, or should it focus instead more on developing rules?
• How should an organization of more than 150 members, at very different stages of economic development, be managed? Has the single undertaking become more of a hindrance than a help to progress? Would plurilaterals or “coalitions of the willing” offer a better way forward?
• Is the WTO’s basic problem its decision-making mechanics - or waning political commitment among its members? Is it realistic to think that re-engineering the organization will be effective unless governments also make a much stronger effort to sell the benefits of the multilateral rules-based system to constituencies at home?
• How should leadership be exercised in the WTO and by whom? How can larger emerging economies be encouraged to take a more active role in advancing its agenda and forging consensus?
• Can progress be made at the multilateral level while proliferating bilateral agreements absorb ever more of governments’ attention and negotiating capacity. Can the WTO ever regain effectiveness without an agreement to impose stricter disciplines on bilaterals?
• Where and how should the boundaries of the WTO’s remit be drawn? Does it need a broader agenda – or a narrower one? Should it seek to involve itself more in issues such as climate change and currencies? Can it avoid being drawn into the debate on such questions?
• Can the WTO’s disputes procedures remain strong and effective if its legislative activities atrophy?

• How to Revive Doha with Some Chance of Success (pdf - 189kb)

What can trade regulation contribute towards ameliorating the GHG emissions and reducing their concentrations in the atmosphere? This collection of essays analyses options for climate-change mitigation through the lens of the trade lawyer. By examining international law, and in particular the relevant WTO agreements, the authors address the areas of potential conflict between international trade law and international law on climate mitigation and, where possible, suggest ways to strengthen mutual supportiveness between the two regimes. They do so taking into account the drivers of human-induced climate change in energy markets and of consumption.

• Making Certification Work for Sustainable Development: The Case of Biofuels (ppt - 344kb)

The objective of the Symposium is to enable stakeholder groups to express their views on some of the important issues being discussed in connection with the Doha Round (DR) negotiations. The major issue to be discussed at the CPD dialogue is the market access for LDCs in case of industrial goods, agricultural products and services

In view of the possibility of non-conclusion of the DR whether an early harvest can be agreed upon on some areas notwithstanding the provision of single undertaking will be explored in the CPD dialogue. In the backdrop of the global financial crisis and its impact on LDCs the session will focus on ideas and strategies from strengthening the LDC economies. The session will also examine other possible forums beyond the multilateral trade regime to flag LDC interests. Special focus will also be on identifying common LDC interest particularly with respect to African and Asia-Pacific LDCs.

Focus of the session:

• How market access for LDCs in case of industrial goods, agricultural products and services can be ensured
• In view of the possibility of non-conclusion of the DR whether an early harvest can be agreed upon on some areas notwithstanding the provision of single undertaking
• How LDC economies can be strengthened in the backdrop of the global financial crisis and its impact on LDCs
• What forums can be thought of beyond the multilateral trade regime to flag LDC interests
• Can there be a common LDC interest particularly with respect to African and Asia-Pacific LDCs

Draft Agenda

• 10:30 – 10:45 Prof. Mustafizur RAHMAN chair Executive Director, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD), Bangladesh Introductory remarks Mr Ricardo Melendez ORTIZ Executive Director, ICTSD, Geneva
• 10:45 – 11:55 Panel discussions HE Mr Jean FEYDER, Ambassador of Luxembourg to WTO, Chairman, WTO Subcommittee on LDCs and President, UNCTAD/TDB; H.E. Dr. Mothae MARUPING, Ambassador of Lesotho to WTO and former coordinator of LDCs in WTO; Dr Debapriya BHATTACHARYA, Special Advisor on LDCs, Office of the Secretary General, UNCTAD, Geneva and Former Ambassador of Bangladesh to the WTO; Ms. Annet BLANK, Counsellor and Head of LDC Unit, WTO; Mr Ratnakar ADHIKARI, General Secretary, South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Environment, (SAWTEE), Nepal; Dr David LUKE, Senior Advisor and Coordinator, UNDP, Geneva
• 11:55- 12:25 Open discussions
• 12:25-12:30 CLOSING AND THANKS GIVING

Trade facilitation can play a critical role in harnessing the benefits of trade reform. The potential benefits of a trade facilitation agenda for small and very poor countries can be large, especially when conceived and implemented at the regional level. The case is even stronger for landlocked countries as they depend on actions by neighbours to ensure adequate access to key trade and transport links, such as ports. A regional trade facilitation agenda could be a useful mechanism to improve national infrastructure and promote policy reforms and enhance competitiveness. Cross-border infrastructure and policy cooperation (harmonization, mutual recognition, and common regulatory systems) can help lower trade costs. The establishment of a transport and trade facilitation corridor linking two or more countries can be a mechanism that reduces trade costs both directly and indirectly – by increasing the incentives of all countries involved to monitor “performance” of the corridor.

This panel aims to bring together the experiences of trade facilitation programs to inform low-income countries’ efforts towards reducing transactions costs and effectively competing in regional and international markets. Panellists and participants will:

Discuss concrete trade facilitation experiences in addressing impediments to trade expansion.

Draw lessons applicable in low-income countries

Consider elements of an effective pro-poor trade facilitation agenda in low-income countries, particularly the LDC and SSA.

Panelists:

Bernard Hoekman, Director, International Trade Department, World Bank

Dominique Njinkeu, Program Coordinator of the Trade Facilitation Facility, World Bank

Mark van der Horst, Director EU affairs, United Parcel Service

The Honourable Felix C. Mutati, Minister of Commerce Trade and Industry, Republic of Zambia (tbc)

• Trade Facilitation - Kunio Mikuriya (ppt - 723kb)
• Trade Facilitation Facility: Fighting Poverty Through the Engine of Trade (ppt - 1505kb)
• Aid for Trade Facilitation Partnership: The Benefits of Lower Trade Costs for Developing Nations (ppt - 1339kb)

The availability of a legalistic, rules-based and transparent dispute settlement system contributes immensely to the efficacy and hence appeal of the multilateral trading system. Yet, current enforceability mechanisms have proven to be deficient. One important example is the uncertain legal status of retrospective remedies.

Considering the lengthy period of time often required for settling disputes under the DSU and the prominence of measures such as those subsidies granted in the current economic context, where the possibility of a ruling of WTO-inconsistency does not provide sufficient deterrent effect, retrospective remedies can be essential for the fair and effective settlement of trade disputes and controversies. Situations where measures found to be WTO-inconsistent are maintained beyond a reasonable period of time and withdrawn only before a ruling authorizing retaliation likewise highlight the relevance of retrospective remedies.

In the absence of clear provisions in the DSU, a number of Panel rulings, first and foremost the Article 21.5 Panel in Australia-Automotive Leather II, have addressed the issue of retrospective remedies – yet its legal nature and status under WTO law remains unresolved.

The roundtable discussion organised by Van Bael & Bellis and ICTSD will address various legal, political and economic issues relating to the mechanism of retrospective remedies under WTO Law. Keynote speaker Jean-François Bellis, former panel member in Australia-Automotive Leather II, will introduce the session by giving an insight into the panel’s considerations and experiences when taking its highly controversial ruling. Eminent discussants from renowned law firms and international institutions will complement the panel by giving presentations on the concerns and positions of developing countries, the economic and political difficulties that would come with the introduction of retrospective remedies, and domestic experiences of WTO Member countries.

14:00-14:15 Opening Remarks by ICTSD

14:15-15:15 Panel Discussion

Moderator: Miguel RODRIGUEZ Senior Fellow, ICTSD

Keynote Speaker: Jean-Francois Bellis Partner, Van Bael & Bellis Former Panel Member in Australia-Leather II

Developing Countries and Retrospective Remedies - Elliott Paige Officer, WTO Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation

Economic and Legal Difficulties Surrounding Retrospective Remedies - Arthur E. Appleton Partner, Appleton Luff – International Lawyers

The Experience of the EU: Denying Retrospective Remedies in Case of The Failure to Comply - Christian Pitschas Director, WTI-Advisors

15:15-16:00 Open Discussion

• Liability of the EU for Non-Compliance with WTO-Commitments? (ppt - 286kb)
• Vulnerability, Export Diversification and Market Access Agenda for the LDCs (file - 82kb)

This session will continue to explore the push for reform initiated by IISD with the launch of its publication: A Sustainable Development Roadmap for the WTO. It will ask how the WTO can better achieve its stated goal of sustainable development – a discussion which first involves deciding which of the many possible relevant issues belong on the WTO agenda and which do not. It will cover, among other issues: environment, development, accession, multilateralism and dispute settlement.

• A Sustainable Development Roadmap for the WTO (pdf - 3094kb)

Within the last years the WTO has actively promoted accession to the organization. This is consistent with its belief that trade growth is both the key to broadening development opportunities and that trade liberalization is the key to trade growth. From the WTO perspective, the more members, the more the total benefits that can be achieved. Since January, 1, 1995 forty three countries applied for WTO membership. Currently 28 states are at different stages of accession processes.

WTO membership is especially important for economies in transition of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia. Became independent they were facing the immediate problem of integration into world-wide economic structures. Besides they consider their accession to the WTO as a major precondition for becoming part of the international division of labor, attracting investments and accelerating economic growth. However the countries of the region have a lot of roadbumps related both with WTO rigorous procedures and provisions on accession and specific stage of their development. These problems and challenges of countries of the region will be discussed at the session.

Five countries of the region have already joined the WTO. Have their expectations to get benefits from the WTO membership been fulfilled? Do they have negative consequences as pessimists predicted? Do Doha round negotiations meet specific situation of Recently Acceded Countries of the region?

These issues will be addressed at the session. Finally the role if civil society in trade policy will be considered.

• WTO Accession and Sustainable Development: Russia, Caucasus and Central Asia Countries Perspectives (ppt - 140kb)
• Kyrgyzstan and WTO: Hopes, Problems, Results (ppt - 261kb)