Economic Benefits - Assignment Example

?Business School College International Economics Consider how we can identify and asses the economic benefits that might occur as a result of a successful conclusion to the current and recent trade negotiations at the WTO. How can we use economics to identify the beneficiaries of the current failure to reach agreement? Customer name Instructor Academic year Introduction The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an umbrella organization that was founded after the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations (Ezeani 2010). It is considered as the only international organization, having extensive reach all over the world, which makes and regulates trading rules and activities amongst countries (Bruch & Environmental Law Institute 2002). The organization was established in 1944 and in early 1995, it replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), becoming the main organization fuelling the process of trade negotiations. The Secretariat of the WTO is present in Geneva and more than 140 countries are members of the organization, constituting for about 97% of the trade all over the world. 30 other countries have a negotiating membership in WTO. The main role of WTO is to mitigate the barriers that are present to global trade as well as to make the process of trade on the international level more transparent and predictable. Moreover the WTO functions to regulate and enforce the laws that are formulated by the organization to maintain transparency in trade and to regulate the exchange of goods that take place under the category of imports and exports of both goods and services. The laws that are passed by the WTO can be amended through trade negotiations to promote the genuine interests of the members. It can be argued that amendments to trade negotiations have an impact on the economy of the country in the same way as trade policies themselves do. The aim of this paper is to delve in greater detail regarding the basics of economic analysis and how is it used in trade negotiations. Moreover the paper explores the probable economic benefits that may culminate due to the success of the trade negotiations. The paper discusses how economics can be used for the purpose of identification of current failure of Beneficiaries to come to an agreement regarding trade negotiations. Analysing the WTO in this context, one comes to appreciate that the organization serves two prime functions (Bruch & Environmental Law Institute 2002). Firstly, the WTO has a policymaking role. This follows that WTO provides a platform for nations to come unite and discuss various aspects of trade between them. Countries are called together for the purpose of negotiating multilateral trade agreements. In this regard, the WTO also has the authority to review the trade policies of the member countries. Secondly, the WTO serves a dispute settlement role. The WTO provides yet another platform for countries to come to a solution regarding their disputes which surface as a result of the trade agreements between the countries. The policymaking role of the Organization is primarily member-driven; on the other hand, the dispute settlement position gives the duty of resolving disputes to independent ad hoc panels (Bruch & Environmental Law Institute 2002). One aspect that the Organization has to deal with respect to trade is trade negotiations. Negotiations are wrought with dilemmas and disagreements amongst the participating nations and it is not easy to reach a consensus regarding many of the issues under discussion. When participating in a summit, nations would tend to get their version of the amendment put into effect, subserving their own national priorities. Therefore, one can establish that the process of trade negotiations on such a vast scale is never a win-win situation. The process of trade negotiations between countries has an impact on the rules and regulations that WTO drafts and enforces. The process of trade negotiations and the subsequent changes that are made to the trade agreements to make it more reliable and holistic given the changing times is not easy. Before the formation of the WTO, most of the countries were signatories of the GATT; there was no global organization in existence that dealt with the dynamics of international trade. Countries that were part of the GATT used to come together on a regular basis and collaborated on the enforcement of the laws set by the Organization; the laws were put into effect by a small group of staff. The transition from the GATT to the WTO did not accompany any major changes in the process of formulation and enforcement of trading laws and their subsequent discussion. Today, the GATT serves as the foundational contract for trading laws between nations (Smith, Sumner & Rosser 2006). The changes made to the rules and regulations determined in the WTO agreements not only provide developing countries with opportunities to compete with developed countries on a level playing field but there are also economic consequences of the amendments. Negotiations that have proven to yield productive results have focused on the amelioration of the trading deficits that are brought about by the current economic laws. Since the trade agreements regulate the degree of trade in a country, they are bound to have an impact on the economy of the country. It can be argued that trade negotiations have an impact on the rate of employment in a country, coupled with the economic growth as represented in the GDP of the country. Trading policies may also impact the trends of consumption and subsequently the buyers and suppliers in the region (Akyuz 2005). History of Trade Negotiations Hampson and Hart (1999) observe that only a very small number of negotiations are able to satisfactorily take into account and come to a solution to every topic of debate or issue. Ultimately, participating states come to a compromise and give up some of their individual demands in order to get some of their other demands met; matters are also delayed for another time. The history of trade negotiations under the GATT/WTO dates back till the establishment of the GATT. The GATT was formulated after the Second World War, when there was a greater need for a supervisor that kept a check on the trade carried out between the nations. The GATT was a multilateral treaty and the laws that were made under it are representative of the rules for trading amongst nations. A specialized constituent of the trade regulation mechanism was the International Trade Organization, which dealt with barriers related to trade as well as other economic effects of the trade activities of the member nations. Even though the GATT was replaced by the WTO, it served as an important multilateral treaty for more than half a century and formed the basis of further trade negotiations held between countries later on. There were seven negotiating rounds held since the inception of the GATT. The first five of the rounds primarily dealt with the reduction of tariffs; in fact this may be considered to be the most important achievement of the GATT since 1947. The sixth round of negotiations was aimed to explore and discuss the non-tariff barriers; however, the goal was not realised in the Kennedy Round and it did not yield much productive results (Jackson & Royal Institute of International Affairs 1990). Like many negotiations, the Tokyo Round did not reach any conclusive stage for some issues under consideration. The Tokyo Round of the 1970s achieved some ground regarding the non-tariff barriers. However, it failed to come to a consensus regarding a code on safeguards to resolve the array of issues rife in the agricultural sector. The Round also did not discuss the proposal presented by the US about counterfeiting policies (Hampson & Hart 1999). This is representative of the fact that negotiation, from a multilateral perspective, on the reduction of non-tariff barriers was complicated as compared to other matters of trade negotiations since it took several Rounds to come to a decision regarding it. After the Tokyo Round of negotiations was completed it became clear that a new round would soon be required. The purpose for this prediction was partially attributed to the bicycle theory of trade policy by some theorists (Jackson & Royal Institute of International Affairs 1990); this meant that in order to prevent the bicycle from toppling over, there needs to be consistent propulsive movement in the forward direction. Moreover it was also observed by some critics that there would be greater chances of governments to backslide if they were not given any incentives on the trade policy (Jackson & Royal Institute of International Affairs 1990). Economists also pointed to the fact that as the different parts of the world were becoming integrated to each other, implying greater degree of complexity, the regulations of the GATT would not be adequate to meet the demands of the current international interactions and to prevent and manage any tensions that arose between them. The Ministerial Conference is regarded as the highest institutional body and it meets at least once every two years. The First Ministerial Conference was held in Singapore in 1996, and since 1996, there have been five Ministerial Conferences that have been convened till 2004. The Third Ministerial Conference was held in Settle in 1999. Some of the members pressed for a Millennium Round but there was no common consensus about it amongst the members, and the recommendation also met with protests by the public. The 2001 Fourth Ministerial Conference, held in Doha, is significant for the creation of a new round of negotiations, referred to as the Doha Round. The members passed the Ministerial Declaration, also referred to as the Doha Declaration. The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) was also made under the Doha Declaration. It was decided in the Conference that the Committee on Trade and Development is going to be in charge of the identification and the developmental dimensions of debates relating to negotiations. The Fifth Ministerial Conference was held in Cancun, Mexico, in September 2003. The main role of the Conference decided then was considered to be keeping a check on the progress being made in negotiations amongst countries and other related work under the Doha Development Agenda. It was in the Fifth Ministerial Conference when the Ministerial Conference was given the authority on taking decisions that fell under the category of Multilateral Trade Agreements (Organisation mondiale du commerce 2003). However, the members made a desertion in the Fifth Ministerial Conference to “go to the beach” rather than attend the Conference is representative of the need to consider the multilateral option (Dabbah 2010). The Doha Conference was supposed to come to a conclusion regarding various aspects of multilateral trade, but the disagreements between the developing and the developed countries did not let any consensus be achieved. The Doha Negotiations are still being carried on today, and there is no tentative deadline when they are expected to reach a conclusion. Although the Ministerial Conference that was held later on in Geneva was close to reaching a solution to the problems that were under discussion since the Doha Conference, the lack of flexibility of the US to yield to the demands of the proposed solution and its consistence pursuit of its own interests led to the delay of the talks again (Wise and Gallagher 2008). Moreover the reason for the failure of the Cancun Ministerial was also related to the inability to start negotiations on Singapore issues that were the topic of conflict between the industrialized and developing countries (Honma 2006). Although negotiations are being carried out every year to come to a conclusion regarding the Doha issues, there is a greater need for the developed countries to bend for the promotion of the interests of LDCs. The WTO has not been ignorant of the demands and interests of the poorer members. In 1995, a committee was also set up by the name of Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries (LDCs). The aim of the committee was to give due attention to the interests of the LDCs and to take into account the specific issues of these countries. The committee was also designated the role of reviewing on a regular basis the multilateral agreements and other allied Ministerial decisions in the interests of these countries and to aid and facilitate in the creation and promotion of trade and investment activities in the countries, with the goal of assisting them in realising their developmental goals. The Sub-Committee was responsible for formulating a work program for LDCs and to present it to the Committee on Trade and Development. A Plan of Action for the Least-Developed Countries was made in the 1996. The Plan of Action was regarded to be a comprehensive plan encompassing various aspects of decision-making and other measures aimed at promoting the trade activities of Least-Developed Countries. The Plan also took into account the different aspects of capacity-building and access to the market from the viewpoint of the WTO. It must be noted that the WTO Agreement is a sole undertaking which all the members have to comply with, excluding the plurilateral agreements (Ezeani 2010). The undertaking is binding on all countries that are members of the WTO and the countries cannot take steps that are in clash with the obligations of the undertaking. Along with the growing numbers of members, the Organization has to deal with the satisfaction of the interests of a diverse range of protest groups such as the media. Jeffery J Schott observed that the WTO is going to suffer greatly on the hands of its slow and complicated policymaking and management. He further added that an organization with more than 120 members is not easy to run by a “committee of the whole” (Ezeani 2010). Mass management could not yield positive results with regard to policymaking and be efficient in its operations. Moreover, critics have also raised the argument that there are some decisions that are going to affect the developing countries negatively. Critics argue that in such a setup that the WTO has, the stronger parties are always going to dominate and override the interests of the weaker ones. Ever since the establishment of the WTO, there have been fears rife amongst the member nations that they will lose the control that they had over their policies, and would be subject to ignored concerns that arise out of an “ever-expanding free-trade Organization” (Ezeani 2010). The later parts of this paper will analyse the economic impacts of the trade negotiations and how this has affected the developed and developing countries. There are various parameters that are going to be considered. These include evaluation of regional trading agreements, special and differential treatment, trade imbalances etc. Moreover the opinions of various critics are also presented in this context. Regional Trade Agreements One of the most significant achievements of international trade over the past few years has been the extension of the regional trade agreements (RTAs), especially in the Western countries and the Europe. The American regions were subject to a fast increase in trade between the years 1990 and 2000. The trade expanded at an average rate of 10.2% annually, which is more than twice the growth in trade in the extra-hemishperic trade equalling 4.4.%. The intra-trade share of the Americas also grew from 48% to 61% of the total (Diaz-Bonilla, Robinson & Swinnen 2003). This increase in trade has been linked to a number of factors such as the establishment of democratic law in Latin America, promoting dialogue and concerted activities relating to exchange between nations. Moreover, there were widespread changes in the trade, macroeconomic and regulatory policies which helped to further enhance the interaction between these countries. The time period was also characteristic of crucial changes in trade agreements. Most importantly, there was a decrease in the number of barriers that existed to trade both on the multilateral, regional and unilateral levels. Multilateral reduction of trade barriers was attributed to GATT/WTO trade negotiations (Diaz-Bonilla, Robinson & Swinnen 2003). On the other hand, trade agreements that were limited to the American continent such as the NAFTA also contributed to the removal of trade barriers on the regional level. Currently, countries are involved in pressing for free trade between them. The ongoing initiatives are occurring based on the global negotiations relating to trade liberalization, which was started in March 2000 and was further buttressed by the Doha Program of the WTO in November 2001 (WTO 2011). The question arises that in lieu of the emerging regional trade agreements and their implications for WTO negotiations, would there be an increase in the welfare of the signatories and subsequently the welfare of the world on the large. In Doha Round, the WTO members sought to improve and give more meaning and clarity to the disciplines and processes that fall under the domain of the WTO agreements and are applicable to the regional trade agreements (WTO 2011). It is incumbent to make legal methods more clear in order to elicit direct effect (Cottier 2007). The members agreed that the negotiations would consider the various aspects of development. The WTO has a Regional Trade Agreements Committee that ensures that the policies of the RTAs and the WTO are not in clash with each other. According to the WTO, the RTAs are required to fulfil certain standards. However one of the drawbacks of the way the rules have been written is that the language is not easy to fathom and the meaning is not clear. The language has proven to be the centre of debates amongst members. This constitutes as a critical challenge that the WTO faces, especially at a time when almost all of the member governments are considering negotiating, or have already started, the regional agreements. In the Doha Round, all members agreed that negotiations must be carried out to come to a solution. Negotiations regarding RTAs are taking place in the Negotiating Group on Rules (NGR) which works under the Trade Negotiations Committee. In 2006, a new transparency mechanism was passed on a provisional basis for all regional trade agreements. The Director-General of WTO, Pascal Lamy, said in a speech in Bangalore in 2007 that it is the conditional rights of the members to form RTAs amongst themselves, although they must be subject to some binding rules. As a result of the negotiations that had taken place regarding the RTAs, it was established that the members are not allowed to introduce barriers to trade when trading with third parties. The second condition that exists with regard to RTAs is called as the external requirement. This entails that a free trade agreement does not have the authority to levy higher import duties on members; a customs union is required to work alongside to ensure that the external trade policies of the members of the free trade agreements are “harmonised” and the victim non-members of these policies are compensated in a reasonable way (Lamy 2007). Proponents of the regional trade agreements promote the view that these agreements are favourable for the economy of the members. They argue that RTAs help to increase the degree of competition in the market at a slow pace while at the same time providing domestic industries adequate time to adapt to the changes. This helps the countries to move towards the creation of global free trade. RTAs can also prove to be instrumental in coming to solutions regarding controversial topics such as the agricultural subsidies and trade in services to boot. It has also been argued that political clout and influence can be used along with regional diplomacy to create an environment that is conducive to the resolution of issues that render deadlocks in multilateral negotiations. People who are supportive of the development of regional trade agreements, such as the US trade representative Robert Zoellick, are of the perspective that RTAs are characteristic of “circles of free trade that expand until they finally converge to form expansive multilateral agreements” (Global Trade Negotiations 2004). Some critics argue that the RTAs are not contributing towards the promotion of welfare of both the members and the world. Lamy (2007) is also of the view that RTAs have a negative impact on the global welfare and also have a tendency to diminish the economies of scale. Therefore negotiations are focusing on converting the RTAs into a system which promotes a healthy international trade environment. It has also been forecasted by some critics that have the RTAs “develop constituencies in support of protected markets”, they are going to have an adverse effect on the operations of the WTO, and are likely to complicate them (Diaz-Bonilla, Robinson & Swinnen 2003). One such example is the formation of RTAs by European countries that involve them in the continuation of the Common Agricultural Policy (Diaz-Bonilla, Robinson & Swinnen 2003). The annals of history are resplendent with examples where countries who have had access to high-price markets have led to the materialization of the erosion of preferences. This is considered to be a sensitive issue that has widespread ramifications not only on the market access systems of the developed countries but also for future negotiations. Moreover preferential access for developing countries forms a large fraction of the agricultural exports and production. Poor countries have expressed the concern that erosion of preferences may be an expected consequence of the WTO negotiations, and are going to impact their economy negatively. The RTAs have been regarded as an intricate entanglement of the competing trade motives of the member nations that are going to impede the process of multilateral agreements. Since the RTAs lead to the formation of preference systems, it has been argued that the political and economical turmoil created as a consequence will bud antagonism amongst the nations. Nations have expressed the fear that the RTAs will cause an increase in the anti-dumping duty and cause ambiguity in the regional trade laws of the WTO. Moreover, presenting a counterargument to the view of the proponents of the RTA that RTA increases global free trade, RTAs can have an adverse effect on the global trade since they are responsible for creating a disturbance in the production cycles; this disturbance is associated with the prime driving incentive becoming either the place of production or the supply of raw materials (Global Trade Negotiations 2004). The degree with which RTA activities are taking place is representative of their ability to push negotiations to their extremes. For developing countries, the growing nature of the RTA activities is acutely undermining their representation in all proceedings of the WTO. Moreover, as poorer countries do not have the authority to negotiate the RTAs in a way that promotes their interests, the WTO negotiations should regard the impact of the RTAs on the developing world important. As developing countries rely on the WTO for getting equal rights and promoting progress on the national level, multilateral agreements should be considered as the top priority of the WTO (Global Trade Negotiations 2004). Therefore, the negotiations should take into account the impact the RTAs have on the welfare of the members as well as third party states. The ongoing WTO negotiations regarding RTAs should take into account the concerns of the poor countries and consider granting them compensations (Diaz-Bonilla, Robinson & Swinnen 2003). The successful completion of the WTO negotiations would help to promote RTAs, which are going to benefit the signatories, given certain conditions so that the RTA does not result in any undesirable economic consequences. Dispute Settlement Unit of the WTO The WTO has a committee for the settlement of disputes that are arising between nations. As discussed earlier, the developing countries are dependent on the WTO for the resolution of their problems and in providing them fair compensations for promoting their progress. However, the global economy has a stronger control over dynamics of trade and increased the role and power of protectionism in the global market structure; this leads to mitigation in the gains. Countries often indulge in the act of gain claiming, the purpose of which is to shape the agreement as devised by negotiations into their own favour. Gain claiming cause inefficiency in WTO negotiations as well as causing delay in the agreements and loss of interests in other negotiations (Zahrnt 2007). It has been established that the developing countries derive the maximum advantages from the dispute settlement system if the WTO. It has been considered as one of the most important achievements of the WTO. Therefore the negotiations that have culminated in the successful inception of the system allow not only the developing countries but also the developed world to enhance their trading capacities. Financial Services Agreement The 1997 Financial Services Agreement of the WTO is an example of successful negotiations amongst the member nations. Financial services are considered to be constituents of the built-in agenda of the Organization. The degree and nature of liberalization that WTO members are required to negotiate relates to the achievement of higher levels of liberalization coupled with its character of decreasing or completely uprooting its negative impacts “on trade in services of measures as a means of providing effective market access” (Taylor 2000). In the context of financial services, the 1997 Financial Services Agreement was significant in promoting financial liberalisation in trade carried out across the border in insurance services while serving as a vital foundation for future negotiations regarding financial services to be carried out. However there are still barriers to the liberalization of financial services; these barriers can be categorized under the headings market access, services that are offered on the international level, as well as fiscal and regulatory barriers (Taylor 2000). Service trade liberalization is regarded as a significant part of the ongoing negotiations (Hertel & Martin 2001). There is also a need for the regulation of financial services liberalization and other associated activities. Therefore Taylor (2000) is of the view that the ongoing negotiations regarding financial services are going to take into account the barriers that exist and to encourage regulated liberalization for the promotion of economic advantages to both the suppliers and the recipients. Industrial Tariffs The WTO negotiations regarding industrial tariff have raised several issues pertaining to development and progress in the countries. One of the issues raised in reference to the WTO negotiations on industrial tariff is regarding the imposition of barriers that are faced by the main exporters of developing countries during the process of enhancing production and trade in the region. The round of WTO negotiations proposes tariff reductions, but in a research conducted by Cordoba, Laird and Vanzetti (2005), it was seen that developing countries are likely to face problems in the implementation of these changes. The negotiations are thought to produce more longer-term gains in welfare and exports, but they also lead to an increase in the number of goods and services imported in the country, offsetting the Balance of Trade. There would also be more revenue losses and falls in output, and this would override the benefits that are achieved from the WTO negotiations. In order to adapt to the changes proposed in the negotiations, developing countries would have to change some of their policies to keep the burden of adjustment as small as possible. With respect to changes in the industrial tariffs as discussed in the negotiations, some countries are going to experience high rates of growth in some sectors, while most of the countries would be faced with the introduction of important adjustments. It has also been documented that “the estimated tariff revenue losses could have a strong negative impact on government revenues in a number of countries, and new policies would need to be put in place in a number of developing countries” (Cordoba, Laird & Vanzetti 2005). Multilateral Trade Liberalisation There are strong chances that the WTO negotiations are going to case multilateral trade liberalisation. It has been observes in a research conducted by Yu and Jensen (2005) that the worldwide trade liberalization are going to be advantageous to the major traders. The EU alone is going to have an estimated welfare gain of more than US$16 billion whereas the worldwide welfare gains would be expected to increase US$71 billion. On the contrary, developing countries are going to be negatively impacted, as exemplified by the case of the Sub-Saharan Africa region, which is going to be subject a loss of US$444 million. The effect of the worldwide trade liberalization would be to increase the market price for products, which would cause a fall in the terms of trades of the poorest countries characteristic of a high number of food imports as compared to their exports. Therefore, one can see that the LDCs would be caught in a cycle where they are going to oppose liberalization while at the same time becoming more dependent on rich countries to help them. Most of the WTO members are in favor of liberalization. If the negotiations conclude to promote the worldwide trade liberalization, then the interests of the poorer countries would be undermined. One solution to the problem is that “poor countries should unilaterally dismantle their own protectionist policies in order to increase trade and stimulate economic growth” (Yu & Jensen 2005). Conclusion In the above discussions, one can see that some WTO negotiations have yielded success whereas others have not been able to give productive results. The RTAs are the hotbed of debate amongst the proponents and the opponents of the economic activity. However the WTO has acknowledged the emerging role of the RTAs and the current and future negotiations are focusing on making the policies more clear and explicit. One can argue that the RTAs are causing adverse effects on the economy of the developing countries and the delay in the passage of decisions regarding it can further subject developing countries to the demands of the developed countries. The financial services and the dispute management aspects of WTO negotiations have produced positive results, and both the developing and the industrialized world have been recipients of the economic benefits, although developing countries may have advantaged relatively more. On the contrary, negotiations relating to industrial trade tariffs and multilateral liberalization have sparked the fear of the developing countries. The issues that still have not been resolved since the Doha Round are exacerbating the negative impact of the failures, and the developing countries are its recipients. Bagwell and Staiger (2002) observe that the advantage of trade agreements, regardless of the political intent, is to provide a channel for escape from the Prisoner’s Dilemma. They go on to state that the rules and regulations of the WTO regarding enforcement and reciprocity are shaped accordingly to provide such an escape. Thus, while the nations that have greater control in trade agreements can assert their influence easily, the main role of the WTO is to promote the interests of the developing countries. Therefore negotiations should aim to deliver just solutions to the conflicts arising in trading and other economical activities. Reference List Akyuz, Y 2005, The WTO negotiation on industrial tariff: what is at stake for developing countries? viewed on 14 January, 2011, Bagwell, K & Staiger, RW 2002, ‘Economic Theory and Interpretation of GATT/WTO’, The American Economist, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 3-17. Bruch, CE & Environmental Law Institute 2002, The new "public": the globalization of public participation, Environmental Law Institute. Cordoba, SF, Laird, S & Vanzetti, D 2005, Trick or Treat? Development Opportunities and Challenges in the WTO Negotiations on Industrial Tariffs, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Cottier, T 2007, The challenge of WTO law: collected essays, Cameron May. Dabbah, MM 2010, International and Comparative Competition Law, Cambridge University Press. Diaz-Bonilla, E, Robinson, S & Swinnen, JFM 2003, ‘Regional Agreements and the World Trade Organization Negotiations’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 679-683. Ezeani, E 2010, The WTO and Its Development Obligation: Prospects for Global Trade, Anthem Press. Global Trade Negotiations 2004, Regionalism Summary, viewed on 14 January, 2011, Hampson, FO & Hart, M 1999, Multilateral Negotiations: Lessons from Arms Control, Trade, and the Environment, JHU Press. Hertel, TW & Martin, W 2001, ‘Second-Best Linkages and the Gains from Global Reform of Manufactures Trade’, Review of International Economics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 215-232. Honma, M 2006, WTO Negotiations and Other Agricultural Trade Issues in Japan, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Jackson, JH & Royal Institute of International Affairs 1990, Restructuring the GATT system, Taylor & Francis. Lamy, DGP 2007, Regional agreements: the ‘pepper’ in the multilateral ‘curry’ — Lamy, World Trade Organization, viewed on 14 January, 2011, Organisation mondiale du commerce 2003, WTO analytical index: guide to WTO law and practice, Volume 1, Cambridge University Press. Smith, VH, Sumner, DA & Rosser, CP 2006, Bilateral and Multilateral Trade Agreements, Farm Foundation, viewed on 14 January, 2011, Taylor, M 2000, ‘The WTO’s Financial Services Agreement and the Imperative of Further Liberalization of Trade in Insurance and Reinsurance’, The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 473-481. WTO 2011, The Doha Declaration Explained, World Trade Organization, viewed on Yu, W & Jensen, TV 2005, Tariff Preferences, WTO Negotiations and the LDCs: The Case of the ‘Everything But Arms’ Initiative, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Zahrnt, V 2007, ‘Gain Claiming and Inefficiency in WTO Negotiations’, International Negotiation, vol. 12, pp. 363-388. Read More