infonet-economy

In recent years, the World Trade Organization (WTO) has come under sustained attack from many academics and other observers. Many of the arguments employed in this attack are found in Professor Morrissey's paper and the purpose of this comment is to critically examine them. Professor Morrissey's principal argument is that the likelihood of successfully completing multilateral trade negotiations is being compromised by the number and diversity of matters included within the Single Undertaking (SU). Professor Morrissey advances three "guidelines" through which "core" negotiating topics can be distinguished from "complementary" issues. In his view, only the core topics should be included within the Single Undertaking in a trade round negotiated at the World Trade Organization. The other topics could, he notes, be addressed outside the SU and, in some cases, even outside the WTO.
It should be immediately acknowledged that the subject matter contained in Professor Morrissey's paper is significant, both to scholars and to trade policy practitioners. Indeed, trade diplomats agreed at the WTO's General Council in August 2004 to remove at least three topics from SU for the duration of the Doha Round. In this commentary, I shall first discuss the principal substantive argument made by Professor Morrissey and then reflect on a number of aspects of the argumentation made in his paper.