International Economics – WTO
Abstract
The theories of free trade have been effective to some extent but their application in WTO has
led to some questions on their validity and relevance to the contemporary global trading setup.
The advanced countries have replaced them with New Trade Theories that have been matched
with strategic industrial policies in developed countries. However, the discarded theories of free
trade are still applied to push for trade liberalization among the developing nations. The uneven
power structure between the rich and the poor nations has evolved into asymmetric combination
in the global market. The abandonment of macroeconomic factors that relate to global economy
and the policies on growth and development has had a negative impact on most of the developing
countries’ economies (Helpman, 1984).
Introduction
After the ending of the famous World War II, the nations that finally emerged victorious agreed
among themselves to create global institutions that would oversee and prevent any disagreements
between feuding countries in an effort to control and eliminate all the potential causes of war.
The basic tenets were founded to minimize or prevent the outbreak of war through the
International Economics
2
implementation of the United Nations charter that recommended the elimination of all economic
causes that may result to war by the establishment of three institutions to deal with international
economics. The three major institutions are what we currently refer to as the Bretton Woods
System and these were: The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund together with the
International Trade Organization. All the three institutions were based on neoliberalism
economic principles. However, the US congress opposed the formation of the International Trade
Organization on the basis that it required too much sovereignty to be ceded to an international
foreign body but it supported the formation of the World Bank and also the IMF (United States
Department of State, 1946).
WTO was not established as a pure forum for agreements like GATT instead it refers to a wide
range of various trading activities and services amid the control of intellectual property rights.
The Uruguay Round was actually the eighth Round and which actually established the WTO.
The resolutions also amended the GATT, 1947 to GATT, 1994 which collectively governs the
trade goods while also adding an extra twelve agreements to the amended GATT, 1994.
The purpose of WTO has evolved from the initial concern of the GATT where its major
objective was to maintain the balance of all the tariff concessions that existed between the
contracting parties. To increase the access in markets, contracting parties negotiated and
expanded their access rights by also reducing their trade barriers. Hence they permitted other
contracting parties’ access to their markets in exchange for more access rights to the others
equivalent markets (Hudec, 1970). Free trade has the potential of developing all the member
countries. According to economic theories by David Ricardo on non-restrictive trade between
countries leads to benefits from both countries however if one country restricts trade and the
International Economics
3
other one does not, then the restrictive country achieves more growth unfairly in terms of
improved terms of trade and higher export prices. The WTO is supposed to achieve improved
economic growth for all its members. The neoliberal trade theories as exemplified by Bhagwati
(2005) are applicable on WTO sustainability and its policies on free trade.
Free trade is the process where all the barriers and tariffs that may hinder free trade are
drastically removed and open and fair trade is allowed to thrive. The forces of free market are
allowed to operate without any outside interference. Trade restrictions are normally imposed by
countries that want to benefit unfairly from the international trade. As per the theories of David
Ricardo that the restrictive country achieves more growth unfairly in terms of improved terms of
trade and higher export prices, some countries attempt to gain unfairly but the repercussions are
mostly harsh which are mostly followed by retaliatory actions.
The New Trade Theories (NTT) mostly involved the principles of foreign direct investments,
strategic trade, technology and its impact on international trade. The relevance of NTT to
liberalization can be traced back to the early years when the free trade theory begun in 1776 and
1826 when the Wealth of nations by Adam Smith and the Principles of Political Economy and
Taxation by David Ricardo’s were published. Large scale production ensured more savings and
reduced production costs hence the theories were applicable for effective competitive purposes.
The theories by David Hume (1776) on automatic flow mechanism were more superior to the
aspects of price-specie absolute advantage in traded goods. The theory of reciprocal demand as
founded by J.S. Mill and later the advancement of the offer curve to determine the terms of trade
by Alfred Marshall all played a big role in setting the structures for the current liberalization
policies (Bharadwaj, 1989). The Heckscher-Ohlin concept of free trade utilized the marginal
rates in the classical theory while basing its free trade defence as Pareto’s-optimum on
International Economics
4
comparative labour costs grounds. These theories champion the application of the theories on
free trade on the basis of production efficiency, optimization of resources and the maximum
utilization of the factors of production.
The NTT model is quite different from the other old trade theories in three aspects; a) Economies
of scale or scale economies, b) product differentiation c) Imperfect markets. The concept of
increasing returns is connected to the economies of scale which applies to the internal
management structure of a firm. These theories are directly relevant when determining the
situations where the major trading nations are likely to gain from international trade
(Bhattacharjea, 2004, 111). Small countries can also gain from external markets as the
economies of scale are extended to the international level (Helpman, 1984). The major
contribution of the NTT is basically product differentiation and the general intra-industry trade.
But the international market is mostly distorted by imperfect market and product differentiation.
The concepts of free trade has basically failed to determine the implications of trade operations
in terms of business growth and development especially in developing countries (Bhattacharjea,
2004, pg 117) The wind of liberalization that has been blowing all over the developing world in
the name of globalization has also generated trade barriers and import while others are social
costs of protection and also the effective rate of protection (Corden, 1957). The theories of free
trade fail only when there is interference with the market and which results in increased
unemployment and over supply of goods in the market.
In 2001, the Doha Ministerial Round failed to agree on issues of market accessibility for
agricultural produce especially in developed countries. The Cancun meeting in 2003 also failed
to resolve the issues that were raised in the Doha Ministerial round in 2001 (Das, 2005).
International Economics
5
Finally to conclude, the evolution of the trade theory from free trade to NTT has had its effect
mostly on the following three levels;
a) The application of free trade to determine the doctrine of free trade to the developing
countries. Hence the traditional trade theory that’s related to comparative costs is still being used
to implement or justify the application of liberalization to the developing countries. The use of
outdated free trade policies is aggressively defended in multilateral institutions like the IMF and
the World trading Organization.
b) The uneven power distribution or relations between the rich countries and the poor countries
allow the perpetration of asymmetrical combination.
c) The continued preoccupation with trade liberalization to developing countries by some policy
makers and academics notwithstanding that very little has been achieved in terms of concrete
economic growth that stems from liberalization.
WTO is a great idea as besides its weaknesses it has achieved the following successes;
The Kennedy Round started with the provisions of section 36 – 38 in part IV where the special
and also the differential treatment of several developing countries issues were addressed. The
Tokyo Round dealt mainly with the antidumping, internal subsidies and other factors that
implied general preferences and which were collectively considered as non trade barriers.
The Uruguay Round increased more agreements and also extended the business trade in Goods
and services by adding the General Agreement on Trade in Services and the Trade Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS). TRIPS is largely preferred than Tariff retaliation as it’s
more effective. TRIPS retaliation limits and controls the payment outflows especially on
intellectual property rights and its harmless to manufacturers while Tariff retaliation will often be
International Economics
6
higher than the economic loss or harm that the violating member may incur hence its ineffective.
Economically it’s better and more beneficial to generate less adverse effects from tariff barriers
(Abbott, 2010). The other concessions were the agreement on Agriculture, the Agreement on
Application of Sanitary, Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TNT) and Phytosanitary
Measures (SPS) (Weiler and Cho, 2011).
During the Tokyo Round negotiations, the US proposed a tariff cutting formula that was
forwarded by Swiss. The formula achieved 60% approval by the WTO member countries. The
formula; Z= AX/(A+X) where Z represented New tariff rate and A is a constant while X refers to
the proposed current tariff rate. The WTO also proposed the constant 14 and 16 for the US and
the EU respectively. The US was adversely affected by the formula as it could not reduce any
duties by more than 60% except through statutory powers.
WTO was not only established as a forum for trade agreements like GATT but it was also to
provide other trading activities, trade facilitation and other services like the control of intellectual
property rights. In one of the provisions that were reached at the Uruguay Round, WTO
members unilaterally decided and agreed to revise the major provisions of the initial GATT
protocols on dispute settlement. Several improvements on the provisions were made mostly
under the procedures of dispute settlement some of which had been there and had remained
unchanged since the inception of the WTO. GATT and its successor the WTO were principally
set up to promote trade however according to Rose (2002, 2004a) WTO has never achieved that
goal.
According to Subramanian & Wei (2007) WTO promotes international trade very strongly but
unevenly. In the year 2000 the WTO promoted international trade worth over US $8 trillion
International Economics
7
which translates to about 120% of additional trade across the world at that time. The theoretical
models that GATT and WTO were founded are consistent with the argument that the basis of
their foundation is to promote trade among the member nations and which deeply depends on
what each member country negotiates with, the products involved in the negotiation. The
industrialized countries participated more aggressively than their counterparts in the developing
countries where the reciprocal nature of the trade locked out the developing countries but favored
the developed countries which traded most of their products among themselves. Bilateral trade
registered a big increase among the partners who liberalized their economies than countries that
traded with partners whose economies were not liberalized. The sectors that never witnessed
liberalization also did not experience any increase in trade (USA, 1946).
The trade models adopted by GATT/WTO system are based by design to focus on bilateral
agreements on reduction of mutually agreed trade barrier most of which adopt the reciprocity
principle and also the non-discriminatory policies on treatment of member countries by
extending the principle of most favored nation or the MFN principle (USA, 1945).
MFN Tariff Cuts by Industrial Countries
Implementation
Period
Round Weighted
Tariff
Reduction %
Implied Tariff
level at
Beginning
1948 – 63 First five Gatt rounds (1947 – 62) 36 15.4
1968 – 72 Kennedy Round (1964 – 67) 37 11.3
1980 – 87 Tokyo Round (1973 – 79) 33 8.3
1995 – 99 Uruguay Round 38 6.2
Source: WTO website
www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min99_e/english/about_e/22fact_e.htm.
International Economics
8
The reciprocity principle and the MFN concept are features that were designed and adopted by
the WTO members to assist most governments ease complications of Prisoners dilemma that
may stem from adverse effects of terms of trade that are largely attributed to unilateral tariff
reductions. These principles preserve the agreements against erosion by future negotiations that
the members may not agree with or consent to. Countries that have negotiated the MFN
reciprocal tariff reduction with member countries are likely to experience increased bilateral
trade than those that do not. WTO/GATT concessions are most likely to have no significant
impact on Countries that are against liberalization as member countries prefer to extend the
reciprocal and the MFN principles to member states.
According to Bhandari (2012, pg 412) two major approaches emerged from the Doha round of
negotiations, the fragmentation and uniformity approaches. The legal structure that has been
adopted by the WTO international trade is conceptually based on the two approaches. The
international trading environment between the developing and develop countries are quite
different, The fragmented approach holds that designing similar trading rules and applying them
uniformly to both the developed and developing member states would certainly be unfair to the
developing countries. Most of the developing countries have for many years insisted that the
uniformity approach would certainly dampen the aspirations of many developing countries
determination to develop as much as the industrialized countries. However, the uniformity
approach retained its ground that the uniform rules have to be applied to all countries. The major
argument presented by the proponents of the uniformity approach was that the non-reciprocal
treatment that’s based on a legal structure that’s asymmetrical would make the application of the
fragmented approach to be unjust to trade liberalization and undermine its effectiveness in the
International Economics
9
international market. The uniformity approach would also not protect the interest of the
developing nations but the fragmented approach if granted under the same conditions it’s
performance would result in worse scenarios than the uniformity approach especially to the
developing nations.
The interests of the countries that are negotiating the trade concessions and the reduction of
tariffs are often inspired by the approaches that promote their interests and the available market
structures. Most markets across the world are not perfect or free but they have been designed to
protect the interests of the powerful corporate initiatives. Most markets internationally are
constructed and deconstructed by the multinational companies. They also shape the direction of
the two approaches in the international trade (Bouef, 2010).
The principal reason why GATT was initially founded was to secure affordable resources for
American and European industries and also to open up new markets for their products globally.
The initial intention of GATT was not to create a free market environment for all countries
globally. In brief, the WTO major philosophies are largely borrowed from the GATT legacy.
This legacy is what the developing countries are fighting hard for it to be revised in order for it to
reflect and address the global demand for justice and equity in the international trade.
The successes and failures of the WTO can only be judged on the basis of the outcomes of the
following;
a) The WTO rules and laws that relates to the developing countries
b) The impact and structure of the law and rules that offer special and differential status for
developing countries.
International Economics
10
c) The preferential system for waivers and their impact on developing countries.
d) The treatment and implication of the rules and laws relating to the least developed
countries especially by the developing countries.
e) The participation of the member countries especially the developing countries and the least
developed countries in international trade development and negotiations under WTO/GATT.
f) The impact of liberalization of trade to developing countries
g) The effect of market access rules and laws to developing countries that have been
instituted in developed countries.
h) The future prospects and interests of the developing countries in WTO
According to Bhagwati (2005) a great defender of liberalization and one the advisers of
WTO/GATT, the toughest critic of the WTO are found among the NGO’s such as Oxfam who
agitate for fairer trading terms for the least developed countries. These NGO’s mostly allege that
the rich countries hypocrisies have led to double standards in international trading policies. The
nature of the trade liberalization currently favours the rich nations more than the developing
countries. They have consequently agitated for the complete removal of all the agricultural
subsidies among the developed countries.
Bhagwati (2005) contends that most developed countries have allowed the poor countries to
protect their infant industries through tariff protection, special and preferential trade agreements.
However, these industries have ultimately ended up being inefficient and unprogressive because
of protectionalism. According to economic theories by David Ricardo on non-restrictive trade
between countries leads to benefits from both countries however if one country restricts trade
and the other one does not, then the restrictive country achieves more growth unfairly in terms of
improved terms of trade and higher export prices. The WTO is supposed to achieve improved
International Economics
11
economic growth for all its members. The neoliberal trade theories as exemplified by Bhagwati
(2005) are applicable on WTO sustainability and its policies on free trade.
The complete removal of subsidies from the agricultural sectors in developed countries have
resulted in increased prices of agricultural exports to developing industries as about 47 out of the
total 49 developing countries are basically net importers of agricultural products (Bhagwati,
2005). The subsidies by the European countries were actually benefiting the developing
countries as their agricultural imports were actually cheaper. However the case of Korea makes it
clear that the real intention or motive of agricultural subsidies by developed countries may have
had some ulterior motives (Bhagwati, 2005).
According to Bello & Cunningham (1994) the US provision of the Super 301 in the US Trade
Act that literally mandates the US president to take retaliatory acts against any perceived unfair
trader or nation has been used to perpetrate the interests of the US nation against other countries.
In November, the year 1993, APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) had its first meeting in
Seattle in the US. After securing the larger APEC market, the US revived the Super 301 Trade
Act against Japan after it refused the US numerical targets plus other imports from foreign
countries. China and other South-Eastern Asian countries mounted a spirited effort against the
US government’s actions which they declared as a move towards entrenchment of the US
hegemony in a world that was quickly spinning out of the US economic control. They concluded
that the US idea of free trade was actually trade warfare. The aims of APEC were to dismantle
protected markets, withdrawal of foreign investment restrictions and reduction of state assisted
capitalism. These factors were the bedrock of the East Asian’s massive economic success. The
NIC (Newly Industrialising Countries) opposition to the new free trade APEC and the
International Economics
12
American’s over enthusiasm for its implementation were finally met with a passive status from
such countries like Japan, China and India.
In 1985, the then American President, Ronald Reagan shared the success stories of South Korea,
Hong Kong and Taiwan. Countries that had embraced the American’s free market capitalist
economies and which were shining examples of the capitalism success stories (Bello &
Cunningham, 1994, pg 446). In early 1980’s, the US economic analysts noted that the increasing
prosperity by the NICs were largely due to the huge trade deficits that the NICs were enjoying
against the huge US trade deficits. The major corporations in the US market felt threatened and
excluded from the lucrative NIC market due to restrictions on investments and imports. Thus, the
slogan Free Trade was the war cry that led the Reagan administration to take a tough stance
against the NICs in order to offset the trade deficit that was threatening the survival of US firms
and the US interests hence the US started its journey to reverse its participation that led to the
high-speed development and growth of the NICs economies.
The first casualty was Korea that suffered harsher pressure and stiffer restrictions than other
economies like Japan. The results were evident; the US government overturned its trade deficit
with Korea from $335 million dollars in 1980 to $9.5 billion by the end of 1991. The economic
relationship between the US and Korea, serves as a perfect example of the frustrations that are
placed on the path of a country that threatens to break from underdeveloped to developed
economy. The change in US policy towards was characterized by the Reagan’s Visit to Korea in
1983 where tough economic demands were placed on Korea’s success path. These were; the
elimination of import restrictions, increased property rights protection and liberalization of its
utility services. The restrictive quotas that were extended to Korean textile, the anti-dumping
suits that were instituted against Korean’s TV manufacturers and the Voluntary export restraints
International Economics
13
known VERs dealt a stunning blow to Korea’s economy. The Multifibre Agreement on textiles
reduced Korea’s textile growth from 435 in 1970 to 1% in 1980’s (Bello & Cunningham, 1994,
pg 448). Meanwhile the VERs limited the steel imports to less than 2% of the total US demands
from Korea. Buoyed by its determination to succeed, Korea maintained its trade surplus with the
US to $9.5 billion in 1987 despite the enormous challenges that were placed on its path.
The most destructive action against the Korean nation were the effect of massive agricultural
subsidies that were extended to US farmers by their government that eventually led to excessive
overproduction of crops by the American farmers while pressuring the Korean government to
completely liberalize its markets especially on cereals, cigarettes and beef. The US PL-480
popularly known as the Food for Peace that constituted subsidized exports that were tied to
development projects led to cheap exports to Korea that eventually sounded the death knell for
the Korean’s agricultural production especially cereals. The subsidized exports on agricultural
produce from the US in Korea were cheap compared to the Koreans products hence the
agricultural base for Korean’s products especially cereals was grossly eroded. The Korean
imports from the US short to 300% especially on Corn, beans and wheat. The low prices of these
cereals highly discouraged the domestic production. The Korea’s self-sufficiency ratio dropped
to 6% in 1983 from a high of 27% in 1965 for wheat, while the self-sufficiency ratio for corn
dropped from 36% to 2.7% while for beans the ratio dropped from 100% to 25.7% for just about
the same period. Due to the US exports to Korea for cotton and wheat, the production of these
crops have disappeared from the Korean farms. Korea now boasts of being one of the largest
importers agricultural products from the US. The exports rose from $1.8 billion in 1986 to
$5billion in 1991 (Sam-O, 1989, pg. 18).
International Economics
14
The reasons stated by Bhagwati (2005) the great defender of liberalization and one the advisers
of WTO/GATT and the toughest defenders of the WTO policies especially that agricultural
subsidies from developed countries to their farmers are good for developing countries are a
misconception of facts as the case of Korea has vindicated the claims from NGO’s such as
Oxfam, that agricultural subsidies are not good for developing countries (Sam-O, 1989, pg. 18).
The foundation of WTO is based on free trade where all the member countries have a free hand
to conduct business in any part of the globe and fairly. On the basis of free trade WTO achieved
one of its greatest successes in Geneva in 1947. One of first of the nine major multilateral trade
negotiations was held in during the Geneva talks in 1947 where the participants succeeded in
setting up the rules for conducting trade among different nations as defined under GATT and the
reduction of tariffs.
The other difficulties that have faced WTO are largely due to vested interests where developed
countries are more interested in maintaining their supremacy in the economic world.
The initial GATT legal structure and its foundation was majorly designed to be relatively lenient
towards the rich developed countries. It was not until the year 1965, that Part IV was eventually
included in the GATT legal provisions. The GATT articles promoted the mercantilists interests
from the rich countries. The biased political atmosphere that characterized the GATT”S
administrative and legal structure finally polarized most of the developing countries which
reiterated their demands and conditions for non-reciprocal concessions and treatment. The GATT
provisions were also originally meant to tilt the balance of payments in favour of the war ravaged
economy of the UK that needed to overcome its financial woes. The GATT negotiations by most
African countries were aimed at legitimizing the fragmented approach that were ultimately
unsuccessful. The seeds of fragmentation eventually led to the exploitation of article XXIV of
International Economics
15
the provisions of GATT by the developing countries to deviate from the positions of the most-
favoured nations to foster actions of protectionism. Discontentment among the developing
countries continued to increase as they were not receiving any benefit while dealing with
manufactured products from developed countries. As a result the developing nations were given
the S & D treatment together with the additional provisions of GATT’s part IV of the year 1965
which included a 10 year GSP under the UNCTAD. The provisions of Part IV together with the
GSP system laid the first seeds of unfairness in the international trade arena and which have led
to more harm to the world trade than good especially to the developing countries.
The WTO is a multilateral organization that elicits anger, fear as well as exasperation throughout
its path especially towards the South. Despite the claims by WTO defenders that its legal
provisions, rules, and mechanisms for dispute settlement and global trade facilitation protects the
weak and poorer nations from the actions of unilateral stronger countries. The view held by the
southern negotiators is that the WTO is highly biased against them in terms of development and
in the application of its liberalization policy. Small countries can also gain from external markets
as the economies of scale are extended to the international level (Helpman, 1984). The major
contribution of the NTT is basically product differentiation and the general intra-industry trade.
But the international market is mostly distorted by imperfect market and product differentiation.
The concept of free trade has basically failed to determine the implications of trade operations in
terms of business growth and development especially in developing countries (Corden, 1957).
The wind of liberalization that has been blowing all over the developing world in the name of
globalization has also generated trade barriers and import while others are social costs of
protection and also the effective rate of protection The theories of free trade fail only when there
is interference with the market and which results in increased unemployment and over supply of
International Economics
16
goods in the market. The theoretical models that GATT and WTO were founded are consistent
with the argument that the basis of their foundation is to promote trade among the member
nations and which deeply depends on what each member country negotiates with, the products
involved in the negotiation. The industrialized countries participated more aggressively than their
counterparts in the developing countries where the reciprocal nature of the trade locked out the
developing countries but favored the developed countries which traded most of their products
among themselves. Bilateral trade registered a big increase among the partners who liberalized
their economies than countries that traded with partners whose economies were not liberalized.
The sectors that never witnessed liberalization also did not experience any increase in trade. The
international trading environment between the developing and develop countries are quite
different, The fragmented approach holds that designing similar trading rules and applying them
uniformly to both the developed and developing member states would certainly be unfair to the
developing countries. Most of the developing countries have for many years insisted that the
uniformity approach would certainly dampen the aspirations of many developing countries
determination to develop as much as the industrialized countries. However, the uniformity
approach retained its ground that the uniform rules have to be applied to all countries. The major
argument presented by the proponents of the uniformity approach was that the non-reciprocal
treatment that’s based on a legal structure that’s asymmetrical would make the application of the
fragmented approach to be unjust to trade liberalization and undermine its effectiveness in the
Economists contend that most developed countries have allowed the poor countries to protect
their infant industries through tariff protection, special and preferential trade agreements as
expressed by Bhagwati (2005). However, these industries have ultimately ended up being
inefficient and unprogressive because of protectionalism. According to economic theories by
International Economics
17
David Ricardo on non-restrictive trade between countries leads to benefits from both countries
however if one country restricts trade and the other one does not, then the restrictive country
achieves more growth unfairly in terms of improved terms of trade and higher export prices. The
World Trade Organization is supposed to achieve improved economic growth for all its
members. The neoliberal trade theories as exemplified by earlier economists are applicable on
WTO and on its policies on free trade (Bhagwati, 2005).
The complete removal of subsidies from the agricultural sectors in developed countries have
resulted in increased prices of agricultural exports to developing industries as about 47 out of the
total 49 developing countries are basically net importers of agricultural products (Bhagwati,
2005). The subsidies by the European countries were actually benefiting the developing
countries as their agricultural imports were actually cheaper. However the case of Korea makes it
clear that the real intention or motive of agricultural subsidies by developed countries may have
had some ulterior motives. The WTO benefits to the international community would be most
ideal if external influence by industrialized countries would be limited. WTO has to introduce
reforms that will harmonize its structures and decision making processes and organs to ensure
stability, peace, predictability, sustainability and enforceability in its systems. The reforms
should basically target the large, industrialized and developed nations that feel no compulsion
towards honouring their commitments or those that are mostly not comfortable with sanctions or
other alternative methods of enforcing measures against them or any violating member countries.
International Economics
18
International Economics
19
References
Bhandari, S. (2012) Developing Countries in the WTO and Doha Round, Seoul law Review Law
Bouef, A. (2010) Eight Years of Doha Trade Talks: Where Do We Stand? 11 The Estey Center
Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 349-370.
Bhattacharjea, A. (2004) ‘Increasing Returns, Trade and Development’, in Aditya Bhattacharjea
and Sugata Marjit Globalization and the Developing Countries, pp. 109–33.
Baldwin, R.E. (2009) Trade Negotiations within the GATT/WTO Framework: A Survey of S
uccesses and Failures, Journal of Policy Making Modelling 31 (2009) 515 – 525
Bhagwati, J. (2005, January) The Truth About Trade, Far Eastern Economic Journal, January
18.
Bello, W. & Cunningham, S. (1994). Trade Warfare and Regional Integration in the Pacific; the
USA, Japan and the Asian NICs, Third World Quarterly, Vol. 15, No 3.
Bharadwaj, K. (1989) ‘Marshall on Pigou’s Wealth and Welfare’, in Krishna Bharadwaj
Corden, W. M. (1957) ‘The Calculation of the Cost of Protection’, Economic Record 33
(April):29–31.
Das, D.K. (2005) The Doha Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations and the Developing
Economies, 6 The Estey Center Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 115-147
Hudec, R.E., 1970, The GATT Legal System: A Diplomat‟s Jurisprudence, 4 J. World Trade
615, 616-636 (1970)
International Economics
20
Hudec, R., 1993, Enforcing International Trade Law: The Evolution of the Modern GATT Legal
System, Salem, New Hampshire: Butterworth Legal Publishers.
Helpman, E. (1984) ‘Increasing Returns, Imperfect Markets and Trade Theory’, in R. W. Jones
and P. B. Kenen (eds) Handbook of International Economics Vol I, pp. 325–66.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Ki-Ho, C. (1992) Prospects for US-Korean Trade Relations in 1992′, Business Korea, March
1992, p. 17.
Moore, M. (2007) A World Without Walls: Freedom, Development, Free Trade and Global
Governance (Cambridge University Press)
Pauwelyn, J., 2000, Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rules Are Rules– Towards
a More Collective Approach, 94 A. J. I. L. 335.
Soon, C. (1989) ‘The Korean economy at a crossroads: a blueprint for internationalization’, FYI
27 January, 1989;
Sam-O, K. (1989) ‘Agriculture: buying the farm’. Business Korea, November1989, p 18;
Subramanian, A. and Wei, S. (2007) The WTO Promotes Trade, Strongly but Unevenly, Journal
of International Economics 72, pg 151-175.
United States Department of State, 1945, Proposals for Consideration by an International
Conference on Trade and Employment, in Proposals for Expansions of World Trade and
Employment, Pub. No. 2411, Com. Pol‟y Ser. 79.
United States Department of State, 1946, Suggested Charter for an International Trade
Organization of the United Nations, Pub. No. 2598, Com. 93.
International Economics
21
Weiler, J.H.H. and Cho, S., 2011, International and Regional Law: The Law of the World Trade
Organization. Viewed on 8 December.
