Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The Review of International Organizations 3/2012

01.09.2012

The most-favored nation rule in principle and practice: Discrimination in the GATT

verfasst von: Joanne Gowa, Raymond Hicks

Erschienen in: The Review of International Organizations | Ausgabe 3/2012

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The conflicts of interest that prevailed between the great powers in the wake of the First World War eviscerated their ability to respond collectively to the advent of the Great Depression. Instead, each turned to discriminatory trade barriers and trade blocs to try to revive domestic output. Persuaded that trade discrimination exacerbated the political tensions that erupted in World War II, policy makers constructed a postwar economic order that institutionalized nondiscrimination. Thus, Article 1 of the charter of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) mandates most-favored nation (MFN) treatment. We argue here that the MFN clause itself encouraged the adoption of practices and policies that actually recreated discrimination. In particular, we argue, developing countries, long regarded as victims of discrimination, institutionalized it in their negotiations with each other. We examine two developing country PTAs that included about 80 percent of all developing-country GATT members by output (the Global System of Trade Preferences and the Protocol Relating to Trade Negotiations). We show that as in the GATT writ large, their patterns of tariff cuts and trade expansion were highly skewed toward a small number of their largest members. In trying to avoid discrimination, policy makers actually encouraged its de facto adoption.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
This figure dropped to about 60 percent after China joined the WTO in 2001.
 
2
The text of Article 24 is at http://​www.​wto.​org/​english/​docs_​e/​legal_​e/​gatt47_​02_​e.​htm, last accessed November 29, 2011. “Substantially all” trade has never been precisely defined.
 
3
GATT members did agree that states that together were a principal supplier could act as one. As this required DC agreement on the tariffs they would cut, it proved useless (Enders 2002: 97).
 
4
McGeorge Bundy and Under Secretary of State George Ball discuss the UN conference 3/64 on trade relations. Miscellaneous. White House confidential. October 20, 1963. Declassified Documents Reference System. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Gale, 2009.
 
5
Various explanations exist for the small impact of GSP agreements—e.g., preferences went only to goods in which DCs had no comparative advantage (Hoekman and Özden 2005: 5); rules of origin could be satisfied only at high cost; and the exclusion of exports as their prices dropped.
 
6
This might seem to exaggerate Article XXIV’s importance as no FTA was declared GATT-inconsistent. Though often attributed to politics, some argue that deviation was rare in fact. Antoni Estevadeordal and Kati Suominen find that FTAs freed substantially all trade in a “reasonable” time period, reduced “90 percent of tariff lines and about the same amount of trade by year ten,” and did so on a “rather homogeneous” and “uniformly encompassing” basis (2009: 163–64). In their view, compliance outliers involved states exploiting the Enabling Clause.
 
7
We omit the eight with three members, as our analysis specifies three dyad types.
 
8
PRTN members could opt to apply tariff cuts only to new members they had negotiated with, akin to GATT Article 35. PRTN, Note by the Secretariat. GATT/doc CPC/W/35 (June 25, 1976).
 
9
Summary of Discussion at First Special Meeting. GATT/ document CPC/S/2 (November 16, 1973), 2. GATT/ doc L/3643 (14 December 1971) contains the text of the PRTN.
 
10
GATT/ doc CPC/S/4 (26 January 1983), p. 3.
 
11
GATT/ document CPC/8 (8 May 1974), p. 4.
 
12
Paraguay, the Philippines, and Mexico had not acceded to the GATT when the PRTN came into effect. The Philippines acceded in 1979, Mexico in 1986, and Paraguay in 1994.
 
13
The quotations in this paragraph are from the Agreement on the Global System of Trade Preferences among Developing Countries, GSTP/MM/Belgrade 10 (April 12 1988) (http://​www.​unctadxi.​org/​Secured/​GSTP/​LegalInstruments​/​gstp_​en.​pdf, last accessed November 29, 2011).
 
14
This paragraph is based upon “UNCTAD: A Brief Historical Overview,” UNCTAD/GDS/2006/1.
 
15
Procedures for Accession to the Protocol Relating to Trade Negotiations among Developing Countries. GATT/ document CPS/S/1 (December 3, 1973), 3.
 
16
GATT/ document CPC/W/68 (14 May 1979), p. 6.
 
18
UNCTAD/ITCD/TAB/1, 27 April 1998, p. 4.
 
19
Conclusion of the São Paulo Round of the GSTP. Briefing Notes. The UNCTAD Unit on Economic Cooperation and Integration among Developing Countries. No. 1, January 2011. http://​www.​unctad.​org/​en/​docs/​webecidc2011d1_​en.​pdf, last accessed November 29, 2011.
 
20
The Subramanian and Wei paper is distinctive in treating membership in different groups—e.g., the GATT/WTO, PTAs, and GSPs—as mutually exclusive (2007: 158). Thus, the WTO control excludes countries that were both WTO members and PTA members, assigning them only to the PTA group.
 
21
Thus, we do not include time invariant controls (e.g., distance, contiguity, landlocked, island). Recent work suggests including time-varying importer and exporter fixed effects; the computer memory required to do so for our sample makes this infeasible. Dyadic fixed effects control for the time-invariant component of multilateral trade resistance (Felbermayr and Kohler 2010: 67).
 
22
Gowa and Kim (2005) include Canada rather than Japan but Japan’s output exceeds that of Canada throughout the postwar period. As in other studies, we code an industrial state here as any nation to which the IMF assigns a country code less than or equal to 200.
 
23
Spain and Greece belonged both to the PRTN and to the informal group of DCs within the GATT. The IMF, however, codes both as industrial states. Because we could not find any archival data about when either left the DC group, we test whether our results are robust to coding them as: 1) industrial states, 2) DCs, and 3) DCs until each joined the EU. (We use the third category in the analyses we report on below). The results are not sensitive to their coding.
 
24
The data set (Tomz_IO_2007.zip) is posted at: http://​www.​stanford.​edu/​~tomz, downloaded July 16, 2007.
 
25
Unilateral PTAs are agreements other than GSPs providing one-way market access (e.g., the Lomé Convention) (Goldstein et al. 2007b: 46).
 
26
http://​www.​ggdc.​net/​maddison, downloaded December 16, 2008.
 
27
For all dichotomous variables, the magnitude of the coefficient is expressed relative to the base group, unless otherwise specified. We use the formula (e β -1) to calculate the size of the effects.
 
28
We group dyads with one and two DCs together, as their individual effects are the same.
 
29
GATT/docs CPC/W/40; CPC/W/42; CPC/W/63.
 
30
The results are robust to omitting the Philippines and Paraguay from the PRTN.
 
31
We report below on the sensitivity of our results to changing the way we define large states.
 
32
PRTN: 0.203 + 0.372 - 0.400; GSTP: 0.250 + 0.05 - 0.400.
 
33
The assumption of the Hiscox-Kastner paper is that the gravity model accurately explains most trade and that the residuals reflect trade-distorting policies such as tariffs.
 
34
We also check whether our results depend on the fact that we compare the GSTP and PRTN with a group of countries that include both least-developed countries and other DCs. To do so, we create a group of DC/DC dyads that do not include PRTN or GSTP members or any least-developing countries. The results do not change. Complete results are available from the authors.
 
35
There are also some cases in which another country joined a preexisting PTA or signed an agreement with a preexisting PTA. We include these in the analysis but not in the table. None of them match the pattern of trade expansion that the GSTP and PRTN generated.
 
36
By comparison, only 33 of the 177 agreements in force are multilateral.
 
37
We also analyzed the data including all PTAs at one time. While the magnitude of the size coefficients changes, their rank ordering does so only rarely.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Bagwell, K., & Staiger, R. W. (2002). The economics of the world trading system. Cambridge: MIT Press. Bagwell, K., & Staiger, R. W. (2002). The economics of the world trading system. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Bagwell, K., & Staiger, R. W. (2011). What do trade negotiators negotiate about? Empirical evidence from the World Trade Organization. The American Economic Review, 101, 1238–73.CrossRef Bagwell, K., & Staiger, R. W. (2011). What do trade negotiators negotiate about? Empirical evidence from the World Trade Organization. The American Economic Review, 101, 1238–73.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Baier, S., & Bergstrand, J. (2004). Do free trade agreements actually increase members international trade? Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95.CrossRef Baier, S., & Bergstrand, J. (2004). Do free trade agreements actually increase members international trade? Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Beckett, G. (1941). The reciprocal trade agreements program. NY: Columbia University Press. Beckett, G. (1941). The reciprocal trade agreements program. NY: Columbia University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Broda, C., Limão, N., & Weinstein, D. E. (2008). Optimal tariffs and market power: the evidence. American Economic Review, 98(5), 2032–65.CrossRef Broda, C., Limão, N., & Weinstein, D. E. (2008). Optimal tariffs and market power: the evidence. American Economic Review, 98(5), 2032–65.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Brown, A. G. (2003). Reluctant partners: A history of multilateral trade cooperation, 1850–2000. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Brown, A. G. (2003). Reluctant partners: A history of multilateral trade cooperation, 1850–2000. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Chase, K. A. (2006). Multilateralism compromised: the mysterious origins of GATT/WTO article XXIV. World Trade Review, 5(1), 1–30.CrossRef Chase, K. A. (2006). Multilateralism compromised: the mysterious origins of GATT/WTO article XXIV. World Trade Review, 5(1), 1–30.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Curzon, G. (1965). Multilateral commercial diplomacy: The general agreement on tariffs and trade and its impact on national commercial policies and techniques. London: Michael Joseph. Curzon, G. (1965). Multilateral commercial diplomacy: The general agreement on tariffs and trade and its impact on national commercial policies and techniques. London: Michael Joseph.
Zurück zum Zitat Egger, P., & Pfaffermayr, M. (2003). The proper panel econometric specification of the gravity equation: a three-way model with bilateral interaction effects. Empirical Economics, 28, 571–80.CrossRef Egger, P., & Pfaffermayr, M. (2003). The proper panel econometric specification of the gravity equation: a three-way model with bilateral interaction effects. Empirical Economics, 28, 571–80.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Eicher, T. S., & Henn, C. (2011). In search of WTO trade effects: preferential trade agreements promote trade strongly, but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 83(2), 137–153.CrossRef Eicher, T. S., & Henn, C. (2011). In search of WTO trade effects: preferential trade agreements promote trade strongly, but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 83(2), 137–153.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Enders, A. (2002). Reciprocity in GATT/WTO. In J. Bhagwati (Ed.), Going alone: The case for relaxed reciprocity in freeing trade. Cambridge: MIT Press. Enders, A. (2002). Reciprocity in GATT/WTO. In J. Bhagwati (Ed.), Going alone: The case for relaxed reciprocity in freeing trade. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Endoh, M. (2005). The effects of the GSTP on trade flows: mission accomplished? Applied Economics, 37(5), 487–96.CrossRef Endoh, M. (2005). The effects of the GSTP on trade flows: mission accomplished? Applied Economics, 37(5), 487–96.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Estevadeordal, A., & Suominen, K. (2009). The sovereign remedy? Trade agreements in a globalizing world. New York: Oxford University Press. Estevadeordal, A., & Suominen, K. (2009). The sovereign remedy? Trade agreements in a globalizing world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Felbermayr, G., & Kohler, W. (2010). Modeling the extensive margin of world trade: new evidence on GATT and WTO membership. The World Economy, 33(11), 1430–1469.CrossRef Felbermayr, G., & Kohler, W. (2010). Modeling the extensive margin of world trade: new evidence on GATT and WTO membership. The World Economy, 33(11), 1430–1469.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Finger, J. M. (2008). Developing countries in the WTO system: applying Robert Hudec’s analysis to the Doha Round. The World Economy, 31(7), 887–904. Finger, J. M. (2008). Developing countries in the WTO system: applying Robert Hudec’s analysis to the Doha Round. The World Economy, 31(7), 887–904.
Zurück zum Zitat Finger, J. M., & Winters, L. A. (1998). What can the WTO do for developing countries? In A. O. Krueger (Ed.), The WTO as an international organization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Finger, J. M., & Winters, L. A. (1998). What can the WTO do for developing countries? In A. O. Krueger (Ed.), The WTO as an international organization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Goldstein, J. L., Rivers, D., & Tomz, M. (2007a). Do we really know that the WTO increases trade? Comment. The American Economic Review, 97(5), 2005–18.CrossRef Goldstein, J. L., Rivers, D., & Tomz, M. (2007a). Do we really know that the WTO increases trade? Comment. The American Economic Review, 97(5), 2005–18.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Goldstein, J. L., Rivers, D., & Tomz, M. (2007b). Institutions in international relations: understanding the effects of the GATT/WTO and the WTO on world trade. International Organization, 61(1), 37–67.CrossRef Goldstein, J. L., Rivers, D., & Tomz, M. (2007b). Institutions in international relations: understanding the effects of the GATT/WTO and the WTO on world trade. International Organization, 61(1), 37–67.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gowa, J., & Kim, S. Y. (2005). An exclusive country club: the effects of the GATT/WTO on trade, 1950–94. World Politics, 57(4), 453–78.CrossRef Gowa, J., & Kim, S. Y. (2005). An exclusive country club: the effects of the GATT/WTO on trade, 1950–94. World Politics, 57(4), 453–78.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Heston, A., Summers, R., & Aten, B. (2006). Penn World Table version 6.2. Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania. Heston, A., Summers, R., & Aten, B. (2006). Penn World Table version 6.2. Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoekman, B., & Özden, C. (2005). Trade preferences and differential treatment of developing countries: A selective survey. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3566. Hoekman, B., & Özden, C. (2005). Trade preferences and differential treatment of developing countries: A selective survey. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3566.
Zurück zum Zitat Horn, H., & Mavroidis, P. C. (2009). Nondiscrimination. In K. A. Reinert & L. S. Davis (Eds.), The Princeton encyclopedia of the world economy (Vol. II, pp. 833–839). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Horn, H., & Mavroidis, P. C. (2009). Nondiscrimination. In K. A. Reinert & L. S. Davis (Eds.), The Princeton encyclopedia of the world economy (Vol. II, pp. 833–839). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Irwin, D. A., Mavroidis, P. C., & Sykes, A. O. (2008). The genesis of the GATT/WTO. NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Irwin, D. A., Mavroidis, P. C., & Sykes, A. O. (2008). The genesis of the GATT/WTO. NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ismail, F. (2008). Rediscovering the role of developing countries in GATT/WTO before the Doha round. The Law and Development Review, 1(1), 50–72.CrossRef Ismail, F. (2008). Rediscovering the role of developing countries in GATT/WTO before the Doha round. The Law and Development Review, 1(1), 50–72.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kessie, E. (2007). The legal status of special and differential treatment provisions under the WTO agreements. In G. A. Bermann & P. C. Mavroidis (Eds.), WTO Law and developing countries. NY: Cambridge University Press. Kessie, E. (2007). The legal status of special and differential treatment provisions under the WTO agreements. In G. A. Bermann & P. C. Mavroidis (Eds.), WTO Law and developing countries. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim, S. Y. (2010). Power and the governance of global trade: From the GATT to the WTO. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Kim, S. Y. (2010). Power and the governance of global trade: From the GATT to the WTO. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Ludema, R. D., & Mayda, A. M. (2009). Do countries free ride on MFN? Journal of International Economics, 77(2), 137–50.CrossRef Ludema, R. D., & Mayda, A. M. (2009). Do countries free ride on MFN? Journal of International Economics, 77(2), 137–50.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ludema, R. D., & Mayda, A. M. (2010). Do terms-of-trade effects matter for trade agreements? Evidence from WTO countries. Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano Development Studies Working Paper No. 293. Ludema, R. D., & Mayda, A. M. (2010). Do terms-of-trade effects matter for trade agreements? Evidence from WTO countries. Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano Development Studies Working Paper No. 293.
Zurück zum Zitat Rose, A. K. (2004). Do WTO members have more liberal trade policy? Journal of International Economics, 63(2), 209–35.CrossRef Rose, A. K. (2004). Do WTO members have more liberal trade policy? Journal of International Economics, 63(2), 209–35.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Subramanian, A., & Wei, S.-J. (2007). The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 72(1), 151–75.CrossRef Subramanian, A., & Wei, S.-J. (2007). The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 72(1), 151–75.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Trebilcock, M., & Howse, R. (2005). The regulation of international trade. NY: Routledge Press. Trebilcock, M., & Howse, R. (2005). The regulation of international trade. NY: Routledge Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilkinson, R., & Scott, J. (2008). Developing country participation in the GATT/WTO: a reassessment. World Trade Review, 7(3), 473–510.CrossRef Wilkinson, R., & Scott, J. (2008). Developing country participation in the GATT/WTO: a reassessment. World Trade Review, 7(3), 473–510.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The most-favored nation rule in principle and practice: Discrimination in the GATT
verfasst von
Joanne Gowa
Raymond Hicks
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2012
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
The Review of International Organizations / Ausgabe 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1559-7431
Elektronische ISSN: 1559-744X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-011-9141-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2012

The Review of International Organizations 3/2012 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner