In the Public Interest and the Uncertain Future of the WTO: Stephen Clarkson, Political Economist

Abstract

For more than two decades the WTO has been paralyzed by the failure to conclude the Doha Round. In retrospect, it can be seen that the WTO was oversold as a tough-minded, no-nonsense regulator of the world trading system with its system of enforceable rules. It promised a level playing-field for all its members; it made a commitment to give developing countries improved market-access in the global North for their industries as well as carveouts from some WTO rules and practices. In the Clarkson gaze, he saw something askew with these neoliberal trade policies. Export centric mega-deals went beyond their original mandate. They became investor-centric agreements that challenged the state’s competence to regulate effectively in the public interest. The result was a growing backlash from social movements and NGOs. In Europe, grassroots social movements mobilized protesters against the Canada–EU Comprehensive Trade agreement and other trade agreements undermining a country’s sovereignty unsuccessfully.