In addition to the aforementioned, there is also a cornucopia of various special committees and working groups which deal with individual agreements and general operating issues. These committees are concerned with Trade and Environment, Trade and Development, Market Access, Agriculture, and Trade in Financial Service, while the working groups focus on Transparency in Government Procurement, State-Trading Enterprises, GATT rules, and so on. These mini-organizations (Trade Policy Review Body or the Dispute Settlement Body) vary across all sectors and report to the General Council or one of its subsidiaries.
Decision Making Process
The WTO continues the practice of decision making inter alia by consensus followed under GATT 1947. The WTO provides for the effective enforcement of its rules and agreements through the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) which contributes to its decision-making process. This is the core function of the WTO in settling member disputes and is a formal process which is based upon the principles of negotiation, conciliation, mediation and arbitration.
Consultation is the first stage in the decision making process and allocates 60 days to members in which to reach a resolution of disputes through the process of discussions amongst themselves. In the event that there is no resolution, a panel of experts will be administered to meet and adjudicate the disputes. These panels comprise of three or more individuals (Government or Non-Government) with relevant expertise in the field pertinent to the case in question. An example would be disputes involving scientific or technical issues. The panel is chosen by agreement amongst the parties and must act as unbiased individuals in their deliberations.
If an agreement is not met, countries involved can appeal to a once appointed seven-member Standing Appellate Body (SAB). Members must be broadly representative of WTO membership and must not be affiliated with any government or affiliated body. This ?review? stage can last up to nine months if the country that accepts the ruling the dispute settlement body adopts the report. If rejected the case (panel?s findings) are then addressed and reviewed by the appellate body. Retaliation may ensue in the event that the ?losing? party does not accept the SAB?s decision, however compensation can be offered towards the aggrieved party as a form of consolation.
Non Effective System
The WTO?s decision-making process is very ineffective and this description of the process is based on many relevant, substantial and informative arguments of numerous critics.
These arguments include:
? The WTO as a fundamentally undemocratic and nontransparent organization
Even though the policies of the WTO impact all aspects of society, it lacks the balance of democracy. This is said due to the fact that the WTO?s rules are written by and for corporations with inside access to the negotiations. In addition, citizen input by consumer, environmental, human rights and labor organizations is consistently ignored and the public cannot attend proceedings which are not made public.
? Unresolved complaints of Lesser Developed Nations
Another reason as to why the decision-making process is deemed ineffective is the absence of participatory inclusions of LDCs and the disregard towards their qualms. A number of agricultural issues have been brought to the WTO?s attention but instead of providing solutions, the process contradicts the issues. The agreement on agriculture is that market forces should control agricultural policies rather than a national commitment to guarantee food security and maintenance of decent agricultural and family oriented incomes.
EU Trade Minister Pascal Lang states that, ?The WTO is a medieval organization. The procedures and rules of this organization have not supported the weight of the task.? This view is a very critical point as to the description of the decision-making process and the call for an overhaul
? Another point of emphasis towards the decision-making process is the fact the WTO undermines the local Decision-Making in relation to National Sovereignty. Developing countries are concerned because they fear that the WTO will formulate rules that impinge on their authority over environment and working conditions. It is important to note however, that the WTO can impinge on sovereignty only if a nation accepts it.
Dominant Critics
Since the inauguration of the WTO in 1995, its protocols have been constantly undermined and closely scrutinized by a cadre of global entities aimed at highlighting the shortcomings and cosmetics of the organization. These groups consist of primary and secondary stakeholders from various sectors such as Agriculture, Government, Health and Labour.
In identifying the dominant critics and illustrating their impacts on the WTO, an analytical model was employed to aid in the determination of the key stakeholders based upon their interests. The model found most appropriate in this circumstance is the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix (See Appendix 1). Stakeholder Analysis is the process of systematically gathering and analyzing qualitative information to determine the interest of those who should be taken into account when developing or implementing a policy or program. (Schmeer, 1999)
After compiling the data the following results were observed:
? The World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
Established in 1961, this organization seeks to promote the conservation of the world?s biological diversity and the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.
? American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organizations
Founded in 1955 and most commonly referred to as AFL-CIO, this is a national trade union center and is the largest federation of unions in the United States. It is made up of 54 national and international unions which together represent more than 10 million workers. From 1955 until 2005, the AFL-CIO's member unions represented nearly all unionized workers in the United States.
? Global Exchange
This is a membership-based international human rights organization dedicated to promoting social, economic and environmental justice around the world.
? The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
This organization seeks to create environmentally and economically sustainable rural communities and regions through implementation of solid agricultural and trade policies.
? Rainforest Action Network
This works to protect the Earth's rainforests and support the rights of their inhabitants through education and grassroots organizing.
? Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs)
A developing country has a relatively low standard of living, an undeveloped industrial base and a moderate to low Human Development Index (HDI) score. Relatively low capital formation, per capita income and widespread poverty are also associated characteristics of a developing country. Development means ''improvement in a country's economic and social conditions''. More specifically, it refers to improvements in ways of managing an area's natural and human resources in order to create wealth and improve people's lives. Development also triggers change in ?low? value added sectors such as Agriculture and Natural Resource extraction and promotes further growth of physical and institutional infrastructures. These LDCs usually have economic systems based on continuous self sustaining economic growth in tertiary sectors and high standards of living. Examples of these economies are North Korea, China and West Africa.
Although shrouded by their own array of qualms regarding global issues, these groups share common ground against the ideologies of one particular organization. Their complaints cover a wide spectrum but moreover their charges converge around the common belief that the WTO extends its power unjustly against their causes. In the following section their grievances are addressed more thoroughly.
Complaints
The stated aim of the WTO is to promote free trade and stimulate economic growth at a global or a near global level. Their purpose is to unify the major importing and exporting countries of the world into a single trading community with minimal trade barriers. According to Berkeley History Professor Richard Abrams, ??the WTO advocates that free trade among countries can and will generally lead to an increase in the standard of living in all participating member countries.? However, the practicality of this theory is a far cry from reality.
The criticism?s of these groups focus on the democratic and undemocratic resonance of the organization, the impacts on national sovereignty of nations, lack of transparency and environmental concern, exorbitant lobbying by interest groups, ills towards human and labour rights, and the dogmatic attachment to liberalization. They also argued that free trade leads to divergence rather than the convergence of income levels within affluent and underprivileged countries and against the absence of a fa硤e for voicing opinions which further alienates the concerns of environmentalist, workers, unions, consumers and human rights groups. Their criticisms can be segmented into two broad categories; goals and structure.
Goals
The WTO strongly promotes its position as an international organization committed to the liberalization of trade by means of an unhindered movement towards free trade. This according to the WTO can be achieved by reducing and eliminating tariffs and non tariff barriers such as quotas, by encouraging trade without discrimination, by encouraging development and economic reform, and lastly, by promoting fair completion. The WTO explicitly maintains, in accordance with its first four principles that the implementation of this developmental paradigm can result in a mutually beneficial (optimal) system for under-developed countries.
Martin Khor argues however, that the WTO does not manage the global economy impartially but rather, in its operations it employs a systematic bias towards ?rich? countries and Trans-National Corporations (TNCs). Khor further states that this practice will lead to the impairment of Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) which have less negotiable power. Global Exchange strongly supports this criticism.
They argue that the WTO does not implement its philosophy evenhandedly and, in a meticulous fashion, utilizes particular free trade arguments to open markets (backdoors) of third world countries while developed countries continue to retain all forms of protectionist measures. Additionally, the network and its affiliates contend that the WTO impacts national sovereignty at all levels of the economic, social and political divisions.
In this view, critics charge that it is a method of institutionalizing an accumulated advantage of developed countries against Third World economies. An example of this bias is the United States, a country driven by free market mechanisms that is able to sustain high import duties and levies on products such as Textiles from countries such as Pakistan. This practice has serious implications for LDCs that aspire to achieve full employment and economic growth, increase exports, develop favourable trade balances and maintain social and political stability.
Structure
?A basic cause of the Seattle debacle was the non-transparent and undemocratic nature of the WTO, the blatant manipulation of the organization by the major powers and the refusal of many developing countries to continue to be on the receiving end.?(Khor 2001)
The second criticism focuses primarily on the democratic and undemocratic nature of the World Trade Organization. The WTO rules are written by and for corporations with inside access to the negotiations. For example, the US Trade Representative gets heavy input for negotiations from 17 "Industry Sector Advisory Committees." Citizen input by consumer, environmental, human rights and labor organizations are consistently ignored and requests for information are denied whilst proceedings continue to be held undisclosed.
Environmental groups such as the Rainforest Action Network and World Wildlife Fund accuse the WTO of engaging in environmental imperialism. They argued that the blatant misuse of economic power continues to disregard the environmental factors associated with trade decisions. An example of this is the failure to protect animal life and more recently the decision taken by the European Union Anti-Dumping Committee in 2007 to abolish market barriers on energy-saving lamps imported from China. ?The decision makes imported energy-saving lamps more expensive than they normally should be and this will encourage consumers to continue to buy cheaper, traditional, high-consuming lamps, which are not subject to any anti-dumping duties," according to Eivind Hoff, Trade Advisor at WWF's European Policy Office. In addition they accuse the WTO of neglecting other critical factors such as working conditions, food safety and human rights. They want the WTO to take these issues more seriously and enforce sanctions on countries that do not meet these standards.
Positive Responses
The Global Exchange is a group which envisages a people centered on globalization, values the rights of workers and the health of the planet; it prioritizes international collaboration as central to insuring peace; and aims to create a local, green economy designed to embrace the diversity of our communities. Global Exchange takes a holistic approach to creating change. With 20 years working for international human rights, they realize the need for a body to achieve and sustain socially, environmentally and economically to aid in transforming the global economy from capitalist (profit centered) driven to community minded. (Global Exchange)
The Global Exchange?s positive response to fair trade realizes that the system benefits over 800,000 farmers organized into co-operatives and unions in 48 countries and enhances the basic needs of family life and investment in community development.
However, farmers are forced to sell their crops outside of the system because not enough companies are buying at convenient trade prices.
This group states that fair trade helps exploited producers escape exploitation and grants them a way to maintain their traditional lifestyles with dignity. Force and exploitative child labour are not allowed under this system. In some cases buyers and producers trade under direct long-term relationships. This enables producers to access to financial and technical support. (http://globalexchange.org/campaigns/fairtrade/)
Working conditions and healthy conditions are safeguarded and equal employment opportunities are provided for all in addition to aspects of trade and production readily available to public accountability.
The Global Exchange group liaises primarily with a network of fair trade importers who are members of the Fair Trade Federation.
With regard to impeachment on National Sovereignty, Judge Robert H. Bork, a well known constitutional authority argues that the issue of sovereignty ?was merely a scarecrow? and that the WTO cannot bind any nation if it does not wish to be bound. (Steiner and Steiner, 2006)
This point is supported by the defenders of the WTO which stated that the agencies decisions by the WTO are generally by consensus, which means that every country accepts the decision. (Steiner and Steiner, 2006)
Environment and animal-related issues have historically earned a high-profile status in the WTO negotiations. For example, two of the most important trade disputes decided by the dispute-settlement mechanisms of the WTO and its predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GAAT), concerned measures taken to protect dolphins and endangered sea turtles from detrimental fishing methods.
As a result, the Humane Society International (HSI) believes that the ongoing WTO negotiations present a unique opportunity for nations to address environmental and animal protection issues. The implementation of this practice allows for the introduction of resource management and proper environmental regulations whilst reducing the damage from trade gains.
Should the WTO be abolished?
Steiner and Steiner argue that the WTO is a powerful organization that coerces sovereign states to change laws and regulations by declaring them to be in violation of free trade rules. The organisation is controlled by the wealthy and does not give significant weight to the problems of developing countries. For example, affluent countries such as The United States have opened their markets to products from underprivileged countries such as the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP); however there are stiff regulations on products imported from these economies. Furthermore, critics recognise that the WTO is indifferent to the impacts of free trade on workers' rights, child labour, the environment and health. The practice of non-disclosure in its judicial hearings for trade disputes illustrates the lack of democratic accountability.
However the General Council can focus on administering and implementing several trade agreements and trade rules, negotiating concerns of food safety laws, product standards, telecommunications, finance and intellectual properties. Additionally they can explore alternatives such as organising forums for trade negotiations, adjudicating trade disputes, monitoring national trade policies, providing technical assistance to developing countries and cooperating with other international organisations. Supporters argue that the organization comprises of member states that practice democracy and would therefore be applied inherently to the WTO. They also argue that by expanding world trade, the WTO in fact helps to raise living standards around the world.
The WTO should not be abolished but should however be tweaked to improvise on some of the decisions made. The following are the issues addressed and the subsequent recommendations that can be implemented.
National Sovereignty
The organisation should meet with parliamentarians and parliaments within developing countries to discuss proposals and developments as it relates to trade disputes. This would facilitate better negotiations and permit better relations and desirability amongst countries.
Undemocratic Practices
This requires further inspection to be put in place in order to achieve a balance and resolve in the practice of impartiality. It would also alleviate the hindrance of representatives such as workers, farmers, consumers, communities, environmentalists and human groups who do not have a facet for opinions.
Environmental Imperialism
In addressing this issue the inclusion of environmental disputes can be involved in the trade proceedings. In doing so this would promote sustainable economic growth and development.
Transparency
This is a requirement that sits alongside ?Accountability? as a growing concern of organisations by society. It implies candidness and willingness to accept public scrutiny that diminishes the capacity of an organisation to exercise any form of deception or deceit. In doing so, the level of opaqueness will be readily relinquished.
Concerns of LDCs
Agricultural subsidies and tariffs employed by the rich countries can be improved, as long as the WTO reconsiders the main exports and sources of income of developing countries before making trade decisions that would damage these economies.
The WTO?s trade rules intentionally prioritize trade and commercial considerations over all other values. The organisation should treat every country differently because they have different customs, cultures and norms in their environment of business. In doing so this would grant Governments with opportunities to be well informed of decision being made by the various sects of the WTO and encourage the expression of views that influence the outcome of policies and decisions (Steiner and Steiner 2006).
Bibliography
Brinkley, Alan. The Unfinished Nation. New York: Knopf, 1993.
Economic Issues Vol. 37: ?Integrating Poor Countries into the World Trading System?
International Monetary Fund 1996
Gilpin Robert, and Jean M. Gilpin. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order University Press 2001
Steiner George A, and John F. Steiner. Business, Government and Society: A Managerial Perspective. Text and Cases McGraw-Hill Irwin 2006
World Trade Organization. What is the WTO? November 26th 2007 .