Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success?
This paper views tariff-cutting formulas as a potential solution to the free-rider problem that arises when market opening is negotiated bilaterally and extended on a most-favored-nation basis. The negotiators in the Doha Agenda chose formulas that are ideal from an economic efficiency viewpoint in...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/149416 |
| _version_ | 1855519320822513664 |
|---|---|
| author | Laborde Debucquet, David Martin, Will |
| author_browse | Laborde Debucquet, David Martin, Will |
| author_facet | Laborde Debucquet, David Martin, Will |
| author_sort | Laborde Debucquet, David |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | This paper views tariff-cutting formulas as a potential solution to the free-rider problem that arises when market opening is negotiated bilaterally and extended on a most-favored-nation basis. The negotiators in the Doha Agenda chose formulas that are ideal from an economic efficiency viewpoint in that they most sharply reduce the highest – and most economically – costly tariffs. When the political support that gave rise to the original tariffs is considered, however, this approach appears to generate very high political costs per unit of gain in economic efficiency. The political costs associated with the formulas appear to have led to strong pressure for many, complex exceptions, which both lowered and increased uncertainty about members' market access gains. Where tariff cuts focus on applied rates, it seems likely that a proportional cut rule would reduce the political costs of securing agreements. However, detailed examination of the Doha proposals with their product exceptions suggests that negotiators are likely to find cuts with exceptions politically attractive but economically costly when cuts are based on bound tariffs with different degrees of binding overhang. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace149416 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publishDateRange | 2015 |
| publishDateSort | 2015 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| publisherStr | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace1494162024-11-15T08:52:17Z Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? Laborde Debucquet, David Martin, Will international agreements marketing trade wto trade agreements tariffs This paper views tariff-cutting formulas as a potential solution to the free-rider problem that arises when market opening is negotiated bilaterally and extended on a most-favored-nation basis. The negotiators in the Doha Agenda chose formulas that are ideal from an economic efficiency viewpoint in that they most sharply reduce the highest – and most economically – costly tariffs. When the political support that gave rise to the original tariffs is considered, however, this approach appears to generate very high political costs per unit of gain in economic efficiency. The political costs associated with the formulas appear to have led to strong pressure for many, complex exceptions, which both lowered and increased uncertainty about members' market access gains. Where tariff cuts focus on applied rates, it seems likely that a proportional cut rule would reduce the political costs of securing agreements. However, detailed examination of the Doha proposals with their product exceptions suggests that negotiators are likely to find cuts with exceptions politically attractive but economically costly when cuts are based on bound tariffs with different degrees of binding overhang. 2015-01-09 2024-08-01T02:49:21Z 2024-08-01T02:49:21Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/149416 en Limited Access Cambridge University Press Laborde Debucquet, David; and Martin, Will. 2015. Formulas for failure? Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? World Trade Review 14(1): 45-65. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474745614000366 |
| spellingShingle | international agreements marketing trade wto trade agreements tariffs Laborde Debucquet, David Martin, Will Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title | Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title_full | Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title_fullStr | Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title_short | Formulas for failure?: Were the Doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success? |
| title_sort | formulas for failure were the doha tariff formulas too ambitious for success |
| topic | international agreements marketing trade wto trade agreements tariffs |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/149416 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT labordedebucquetdavid formulasforfailurewerethedohatariffformulastooambitiousforsuccess AT martinwill formulasforfailurewerethedohatariffformulastooambitiousforsuccess |