Difference between revisions of "Influence of the World Trade Organization (WTO)"

From ScenarioThinking
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 15: Line 15:
*Unfair treatment: Third/second world countries feel exploited by some WTO regulations.
*Unfair treatment: Third/second world countries feel exploited by some WTO regulations.
e.g. Protection of the rich: Sugar import taxes, being above 110% (150% in some countries) in many large rich countries like the US, whilst sugar import taxes in most poor nations were just 20%. The WTO actually insisted those poor countries to drop their import taxes.
e.g. Protection of the rich: Sugar import taxes, being above 110% (150% in some countries) in many large rich countries like the US, whilst sugar import taxes in most poor nations were just 20%. The WTO actually insisted those poor countries to drop their import taxes.
 
# Return to protectionist measures as a result of financial downturn. Protectionist measures aimed at national/regional constituencies can threaten the free movement of goods (e.g. by imposing import duties)
 


==Paradigms:==
==Paradigms:==

Revision as of 14:36, 18 September 2009

Description:

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is responsible for defining the rules of international trade. Not only setting but also enforcing these rules by acting as a court for resolving trade disputes and by placing non-complying parties under embargo. Their ultimate goal is to reduce or abolish national trade barriers.


Enablers:

  • Good cause: The objectives of the WTO look honourable.
  • EU-US trade relationship: Most trade is done between those regions
  • Greed:
    • Large Multinationals: WTO rules favor large multinationals
    • Rich countries: WTO rules favor the richer countries
  • Forced membership: Not being a member of WTO severly limits your trade capabilities (embargo)
  • Globalization

Inhibitors:

  • Unfair treatment: Third/second world countries feel exploited by some WTO regulations.

e.g. Protection of the rich: Sugar import taxes, being above 110% (150% in some countries) in many large rich countries like the US, whilst sugar import taxes in most poor nations were just 20%. The WTO actually insisted those poor countries to drop their import taxes.

  1. Return to protectionist measures as a result of financial downturn. Protectionist measures aimed at national/regional constituencies can threaten the free movement of goods (e.g. by imposing import duties)

Paradigms:

  • Before: International trade was severly limited by local government rules
  • After: International trade is easy now because consistent rules are made internationally.


References: