The RTA Exchange: Why now?

May 26, 2016

At ICTSD for a number of years we have been closely studying the nature and evolution of today’s  global trade and investment system, better described using Keohane and Victor’s “regime complex” conceptualisation. The principles, norms, rules and procedures of the quasi-universal multilateral trade system embodied in the GATT-World Trade Organization (WTO) and its agreements have been, and remain today, the spine of the global system of arrangements for economic cooperation and integration. But in the past few years the track of preferential trade agreements (RTAs in WTO speak) has exploded as countries seek to add to their multilateral terms of globalisation by selectively participating in deeper integration schemes in variable geographic geometry. In 2016, 270 different RTAs have been notified to the WTO and are currently in force, and several others are under negotiation. Meanwhile, almost 3,300 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have been concluded, with a great share of them containing trade-related provisions critical in a 21st century global economy. 

 

Many of these agreements have evolved through time and most now contain disciplines that are wider in scope, deeper in their integration, and significantly more sophisticated than the multilateral trading system — what is known in specialised literature as WTO-plus and WTO-beyond provisions. RTAs have also served as focal points of inter-state cooperation, and as incubators and testing ground for new global trade rules. Overtime, they have become the de facto loci to deepen integration and further trade liberalisation. 

 

But the proliferation of RTAs has also raised a fair share of concerns, particularly regarding the discriminatory effect of RTAs on non-parties and the extent to which they may lead to trade diversion as well as to complex and overlapping regulatory requirements, or divert attention from multilateral efforts. 

 

More complex questions include whether deep integration initiatives encompass standards that outsiders find favourable, whether such rules are easy for developing economies to adopt, and whether they create markets that are easily contested by outsiders. 

 

Another concern relates to the impact of such initiatives on multilateral negotiations. The rise of RTAs has created a sense of urgency among WTO members, elevating the discussion to a “systemic issue” in the Doha Round. On 14 December 2006, the General Council established a new transparency mechanism for all RTAs on a provisional basis. This mechanism — negotiated in the Negotiating Group on Rules — provides for early announcement of any RTA and notification for consideration by Members based on a factual presentation by the Secretariat. By end of 2015, at the 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi, WTO members agreed to work towards the transformation of the current provisional Transparency Mechanism into a permanent mechanism. They also instructed the Committee on RTAs to discuss the systemic implications of RTAs for the multilateral system and their relationship with WTO rules. 

 

As RTAs emerge as the loci of international rule-making in global commerce, the question is not so much whether RTAs should be tested for compliance with GATT 1947 rules on disciplines on RTAs, but rather how the WTO must articulate itself in this new reality of RTAs complexity and build upon them. RTAs, in conjunction with WTO agreements, increasingly define the use and distribution of resources and therefore have a direct bearing on critical challenges such as food security, environmental sustainability, social equity, labour conditions and income generation. Therefore, the focus should instead be on determining how to mitigate the real challenges and harness the opportunities posed by RTAs to foster economic integration and advance sustainable development. 

 

This new approach should focus on high-impact initiatives aimed at:

• Harvesting gains from RTA-driven liberalisation and ensuring the multilateral spread of benefits e.g. through the elimination or minimisation of negative spillovers towards non-parties, particularly through discriminatory elements in RTAs;

• Building on innovations in RTAs, drawing on their experience as laboratories of new trade disciplines for the benefit of the larger global trading system;

• Building on lessons learnt in RTAs including the vast body of tested and tried rules going beyond WTO provisions (WTO-plus or WTO-beyond);

• Multilateralising best practices for sustainable development where significant convergence and homogeneity exist among RTA provisions.

 

A key step in developing this new approach to RTAs and their mutual coherence, as well as their congruity with the multilateral trade system, is through an enhanced understanding of the contents, dynamics, and experiences learned from the various RTAs themselves. Yet, in spite of the large amount of RTAs disciplines, rules, and practical experiences, existing information on RTAs remains ad hoc, uncoordinated, and dispersed across a variety of fora, including the WTO, university centres, think-tanks, multilateral development banks, and regional organisations, as well as throughout blogs and news media. In particular, there is no one instrument or forum that systematically brings together all relevant information on RTAs on a regular basis, let alone that encourages dialogue and the sharing of experiences between RTA- and WTO-negotiators or the various stakeholders involved. More significantly, there is no one platform that encourages a global structured and systematic “mindshare” on RTAs with a view to building synergies among RTAs, and between RTAs and the multilateral trading system. The failure to tap into the wealth of existing information and experience in negotiating and implementing RTAs represents a gaping lost opportunity. This gap can be filled through the creation of an independent platform with both virtual and real dimensions in the form of an “RTA Exchange”

 

Jointly implemented by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), the “RTA Exchange” will work as a first-class forum and independent clearinghouse mechanism to share information on RTAs – both existing  and under negotiation – while promoting a purposeful multi-stakeholder dialogue on the interface between RTAs and the WTO. 

 

*****

Marie Chamay is the Director of Strategic Initiatives at the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). She holds an MSc in Environment and Development, London School of Economics (LSE); and a Management Acceleration Programme (MAP) at INSEAD. Marie Chamay provides strategic direction for ICTSD programmes in the areas of investment policy and regulatory systems coherence, and provides full managerial overview and ensures effective implementation of the E15 Initiative and the RTA Exchange at ICTSD. Former: Global Initiative Manager, ICTSD; Global Platform Manager, ICTSD; Trade and Natural Resources Programme Officer, ICTSD; Intellectual Property Programme Associate, ICTSD. Helped establish ICTSD China in Beijing, and undertook feasibility studies for entities in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the US. Responsible for the ICTSD-IPC Initiative on Climate Change: the Role of Food and Agricultural Trade. Lead author of ICTSD’s report “Promoting Sustainable Land Management through Trade: Examining the Linkages between Trade, Livelihoods and Sustainable Land Management in Degraded Areas, for the Global Mechanism of the UNCCD.”

Topics: WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO) MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (ICTSD) REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS (RTAS)

Authors: MARIE CHAMAY

RTA

In Other Blogs

The politics of NAFTA Renegotiations

December 11, 2017

The biggest benefit of trade agreements for most countries may be their ability to ‘lock in’ policy reforms.   Major reforms to significant economic sectors, such as agricultu... READ MORE

RTAs and the Economics of Disintegration

December 7, 2017

The growing appeal of populist messages and doubts about the benefits of globalization materialized into two major developments in 2016: the referendum that led to decision of the United Kingdom to... READ MORE