Abstract
The World Trade Organisation (WTO), and the international trade regime within which it operates, is regularly evaluated in terms of distributive outcomes or opportunities. A less-established concern is the extent to which the institutional structure of the trade regime enables agents to exert control over the economic forces to which they’re subject. This oversight is surprising, as trade negotiations amongst states have profound impacts upon what options remain open to those states and their citizens in regulating their economies. This article contributes to filling this lacuna in the literature. Following on from recent neo-republican work on global and international justice, it argues that a major problem with the WTO is that it fails to effectively mitigate the domination of some states by others within its negotiations. Such domination prevails despite the employment of negative consensus as a decision-making procedure.
References
Ahlstrom-Vij, K. (2012). ‘‘Review of Frank Lovett,’A General Theory of Domination and Justice”’, Philosophical Quarterly 62 (246): 190–192.10.1111/j.1467-9213.2011.00003.xSuche in Google Scholar
Arnold, S. and Harris, J.R. (2017). ‘What Is Arbitrary Power?’, Journal of Political Power 10 (1): 55–70.10.1080/2158379X.2017.1287473Suche in Google Scholar
Bachvarova, M. (2013). ‘Non-Domination’s Role in the Theorizing of Global Justice’, Journal of Global Ethics 9 (2): 173–185.10.1080/17449626.2013.818434Suche in Google Scholar
Bagwell, K. and Staiger, R.W. (2004). The Economics of the World Trading System (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Baldwin, R.E. (2012). ‘The Case for a Multilateral Trade Organization’, in M. Daunton, A. Narlikar and R.M. Stern (eds.). The Oxford Handbook on the World Trade Organization (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 29–39.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586103.013.0002Suche in Google Scholar
Blustein, P. (2009). Misadventures of the Most Favored Nations (New York: Public Affairs).Suche in Google Scholar
Bohman, J. (2015). ‘Domination, Global Harms, and the Priority of Injustice: Expanding Transnational Republicanism’, in B. Bucknix, J. Trejo-Mathys and T. Waligore (eds.). Domination and Global Political Justice: Conceptual, Historical, and Institutional Perspectives (New York: Routledge), pp. 83–99.10.4324/9781315757506-9Suche in Google Scholar
Brandi, C. (2017). ‘The Trade Regime Complex and Megaregionals – An Exploration from the Perspective of International Domination’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 10 (1): 24–42.10.21248/gjn.10.1.109Suche in Google Scholar
Brock, G. (2009). Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230938.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Brown, A.G. and Stern, R.M. (2012). ‘Fairness in the WTO Trading System’, in M. Daunton, A. Narlikar and R.M. Stern (eds.). The Oxford Handbook on the World Trade Organization (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 677–696.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586103.013.0031Suche in Google Scholar
Cavallero, E. (2010). ‘Coercion, Inequality and the International Property Regime’, Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1): 16–31.10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00343.xSuche in Google Scholar
Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective (London: Anthem Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Chayes, A. and Chayes, A.H. (1995). The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press).10.4159/9780674029453Suche in Google Scholar
Christensen, J. (2018). Trade Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/oso/9780198810353.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Christiano, T. (2015). ‘Legitimacy and the International Trade Regime’, San Diego Law Review 52 (5): 981–1012.Suche in Google Scholar
Clark, S. (2007). Living without Domination: The Possibility of an Anarchist Utopia (Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing Company).Suche in Google Scholar
Collier, P. (2008). The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done about It (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Drake, W.J. and Nicolaidis, K. (1992). ‘Ideas, Interests, and institutionalization:“Trade in Services” and the Uruguay Round’, International Organization 46 (1): 37–100.10.4324/9781315085463-1Suche in Google Scholar
Eagleton-Pierce, M. (2013). Symbolic Power in the World Trade Organization (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199662647.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Filling, J. (2017). ‘What’s Wrong with Republican Liberty?’ the Future of Republicanism: Liberal, Critical, Radical? University of York, July 26th, 2017.Suche in Google Scholar
Finger, J.M., Reincke, U., and Castro, A. (1999). Market Access Bargaining in the Uruguay Round: Rigid or Relaxed Reciprocity? (Washington, DC: World Bank Publications).10.1596/1813-9450-2258Suche in Google Scholar
Gädeke, D. (2016). ‘The Domination of States: Towards an Inclusive Republican Law of Peoples’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 9 (1): 1–27.10.21248/gjn.9.1.99Suche in Google Scholar
Gordon, U. (2007a). ‘Anarchism Reloaded’, Journal of Political Ideologies 12 (1): 29–48.10.2307/j.ctt18fsb5d.6Suche in Google Scholar
Gordon, U. (2007b). Anarchy Alive! Anti-Authoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory (London: Pluto Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Gourevitch, A. (2013). ‘Labor Republicanism and the Transformation of Work’, Political Theory 41 (4): 591–617.10.1177/0090591713485370Suche in Google Scholar
Guzman, A.T. (1998). ‘Why LDCs Sign Treaties that Hurt Them: Explaining the Popularity of Bilateral Investment Treaties’, Virginia Journal of International Law 38 (4): 639–688.Suche in Google Scholar
Hoekman, B.M. and Mavroidis, P.C. (2015). World Trade Organization (WTO) Law, Economics, and Politics: Second Edition (New York: Routledge).10.4324/9781315742212Suche in Google Scholar
Hopewell, K. (2016). Breaking the WTO: How Emerging Powers Disrupted the Neoliberal Project (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).10.1515/9781503600027Suche in Google Scholar
James, A. (2012). Fairness in Practice: A Social Contract for A Global Economy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199846153.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Jones, K. (2009). ‘Green Room Politics and the WTO’s Crisis of Representation’, Progress in Development Studies 9 (4): 349–357.10.1177/146499340900900408Suche in Google Scholar
Julius, A.J. (2014). ‘Practice Independence’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (2): 239–254.10.1080/00455091.2014.942142Suche in Google Scholar
Kelsey, J. (2008). Serving Whose Interests? the Political Economy of Trade in Services Agreements (New York, NY: Routledge-Cavendish).10.4324/9780203933930Suche in Google Scholar
Khor, M. (2000). ‘How the South Is Getting a Raw Deal at the WTO’, in S. Anderson (eds.). Views from the South: The Effects of Globalization and the WTO on Third World Countries (Chicago, IL: Food First Books), pp. 7–53.Suche in Google Scholar
Krueger, A.O. (1998). The WTO as an International Organization (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Krugman, P. (1997). ‘What Should Trade Negotiators Negotiate About?’, Journal of Economic Literature 35 (1): 113–120.Suche in Google Scholar
Laborde, C. and Ronzoni, M. (2016). ‘What Is a Free State? Republican Internationalism and Globalisation’, Political Studies 64 (2): 279–296.10.1111/1467-9248.12190Suche in Google Scholar
Lovett, F. (2009). ‘Domination and Distributive Justice’, The Journal of Politics 71 (3): 817–830.10.1017/S0022381609090732Suche in Google Scholar
Lovett, F. (2010). A General Theory of Domination and Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579419.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Lovett, F. (2012). ‘What Counts as Arbitrary Power?’, Journal of Political Power 5 (1): 137–152.10.1080/2158379X.2012.660026Suche in Google Scholar
Lovett, F. (2016). ‘Should Republicans Be Cosmopolitans?’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 9 (1): 28–46.10.21248/gjn.9.1.100Suche in Google Scholar
Lovett, F. and Pettit, P. (2009). ‘Neorepublicanism: A Normative and Institutional Research Program’, Annual Review of Political Science 12: 11–29.10.1146/annurev.polisci.12.040907.120952Suche in Google Scholar
Macdonald, T. (2015). ‘Antipower, Agency, and the Republican Case for Global Institutional Pluralism’, in B. Buckinx, J. Trejo-Mathys and T. Waligore (eds.). Domination and Global Political Justice: Conceptual, Historical, and Institutional Perspectives (New York: Routledge), pp. 291–312.Suche in Google Scholar
Martí, J.L. (2010). ‘A Global Republic to Prevent Global Domination’, Diacritica 24 (2): 31–72.Suche in Google Scholar
Maynor, J. (2015). ‘Should Republican Liberty as Non-Domination Be Outsourced?’, in B. Buckinx, J. Trejo-Mathys and T. Waligore (eds.). Domination and Global Political Justice: Conceptual, Historical, and Institutional Perspectives (New York: Routledge), pp. 227–250.Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, R.W. (2010). Globalizing Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and Power (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199581986.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Moellendorf, D. (2005). ‘The World Trade Organization and Egalitarian Justice’, Metaphilosophy 36 (1–2): 145–162.10.1111/j.1467-9973.2005.00360.xSuche in Google Scholar
Nail, T. (2013). ‘Zapatismo and the Global Origins of Occupy’, Journal for Cultural and Religious Theory 12 (3): 20–35.Suche in Google Scholar
Narlikar, A. (2005). The World Trade Organization: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press).10.1093/actrade/9780192806086.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Narlikar, A. (2012). ‘Collective Agency, Systemic Consequences: Bargaining Coalitions in the WTO.’, in M. Daunton, A. Narlikar and R.M. Stern (eds.). The Oxford Handbook on the World Trade Organization (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 184–209.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586103.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (1996). ‘Freedom as Antipower’, Ethics 106 (3): 576–604.10.4135/9781446215272.n18Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (1997). Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2008). ‘Republican Freedom: Three Axioms, Four Theorems’, in C. Laborde and J. Maynor (eds.). Republicanism and Political Theory (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing), pp. 102–130.Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2010). ‘A Republican Law of Peoples’, European Journal of Political Theory 9 (1): 70–94.10.1177/1474885109349406Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2012). On the People’s Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).10.1017/CBO9781139017428Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2014). Just Freedom: A Moral Compass for A Complex World (New York: W.W. Norton & Company).Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2015). ‘The Republican Law of Peoples: A Restatement’, in B. Buckinx, J. Trejo-Mathys and T. Waligore (eds.). Domination and Global Political Justice: Conceptual, Historical, and Institutional Perspectives (New York: Routledge), pp. 49–82.10.4324/9781315757506-8Suche in Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2016). ‘The Globalized Republican Ideal’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 9 (1): 47–68.10.21248/gjn.9.1.101Suche in Google Scholar
Pogge, T.W. (2008). World Poverty and Human Rights: Second Edition (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Risse, M. (2017). ‘Realizing Justice in Trade: Multilateralism and Mega-Regionalism’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 10 (1): 1–23.10.21248/gjn.10.1.108Suche in Google Scholar
Shaffer, G. (2015). ‘How the World Trade Organization Shapes Regulatory Governance’, Regulation & Governance 9 (1): 1–15.10.1111/rego.12057Suche in Google Scholar
Steinberg, R.H. (2002). ‘In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO’, International Organization 56 (2): 339–374.10.1162/002081802320005504Suche in Google Scholar
Suttle, O. (2017). Distributive Justice and World Trade Law: A Political Theory of International Trade Regulation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).10.1017/9781108235235Suche in Google Scholar
Taylor, R.S. (forthcoming). ‘Donation without Domination: Private Charity and Republican Liberty’, The Journal of Political Philosophy.Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, M.J. (2013). ‘Reconstructing Republican Freedom: A Critique of the Neo-Republican Concept of Freedom as Non-Domination’, Philosophy & Social Criticism 39 (3): 277–298.10.1177/0191453712473081Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, M.J. (2018). ‘The Two Faces of Domination in Republican Political Theory’, European Journal of Political Theory 17 (1): 44–64.10.1177/1474885115580352Suche in Google Scholar
Vrousalis, N. (2013). ‘Exploitation, Vulnerability, and Social Domination’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 41 (2): 131–157.10.1111/papa.12013Suche in Google Scholar
Vrousalis, N. (2016a). ‘Exploitation as Domination: A Response to Arneson’, The Southern Journal of Philosophy 54 (4): 527–538.10.1111/sjp.12199Suche in Google Scholar
Vrousalis, N. (2016b). ‘Imperialism, Globalization and Resistance’, Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric 9 (1): 69–92.10.21248/gjn.9.1.102Suche in Google Scholar
Wade, R.H. (2003). ‘‘What Strategies are Viable for Developing Countries Today? the World Trade Organization and the Shrinking of ‘Development Space”’, Review of International Political Economy 10 (4): 621–644.10.1080/09692290310001601902Suche in Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. (2000). Multilateralism and the World Trade Organisation: The Architecture and Extension of International Trade Regulation (London: Routledge).Suche in Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. (2006). The WTO: Crisis and the Governance of Global Trade (Oxon, OX: Routledge).Suche in Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R. (2014). What’s Wrong with the WTO and How to Fix It (Cambridge: Polity Press).Suche in Google Scholar
Wolf, M. (2004). Why Globalization Works (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).Suche in Google Scholar
WorldBank. (2016). ’World Bank Open Data’ https://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed on September 14th, 2018).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (1994a). Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (Gevena: GATT).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (1994b). General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Geneva: GATT).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (2013). ’USTR Froman Warns Poor Countries Would Be the Biggest Losers if Bali Fails’ https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/pfor_01oct13_e.htm (accessed on September 13th, 2018).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (2018a). ’Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries’ https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/dev_sub_committee_ldc_e.htm (accessed September 13th, 2018).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (2018b). ’Regional Trade Agreements’ https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/region_e.htm#rules_ita (accessed on June 11th, 2018).Suche in Google Scholar
WTO. (2018c). ’What Is the WTO? Overview’ https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/wto_dg_stat_e.htm (accessed May 18th, 2018).Suche in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Normative Aspects of International Trade Institutions
- Being Realistic about International Trade Justice
- Must We Protect Foreign Investors?
- Making Offers They Can’t Refuse: Consensus and Domination in the WTO
- Global Trade with an Epistemic Upgrade
- Democratic Legitimacy beyond the State: Politicization, Representation, and a Systemic Framework
- Articles
- Rescuing the Libertarian Non-Aggression Principle
- Privacy, Interests, and Inalienable Rights
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Normative Aspects of International Trade Institutions
- Being Realistic about International Trade Justice
- Must We Protect Foreign Investors?
- Making Offers They Can’t Refuse: Consensus and Domination in the WTO
- Global Trade with an Epistemic Upgrade
- Democratic Legitimacy beyond the State: Politicization, Representation, and a Systemic Framework
- Articles
- Rescuing the Libertarian Non-Aggression Principle
- Privacy, Interests, and Inalienable Rights