A Disappointing Monster

By Robertson, David | Review - Institute of Public Affairs, December 2002 | Go to article overview

A Disappointing Monster


Robertson, David, Review - Institute of Public Affairs


Rigged Rules and Double Standards: Making Trade Fair

(Oxfam International, 2002)

It is disturbing and disappointing when a well-intentioned and respected organization such as Oxfam publishes a confused and ill-informed study such as this 250-page monster. The report argues that expanding international trade has assisted some developing economies to grow, but that more should be done to alleviate poverty by adapting WTO rules to give new preferences to all developing countries. This implies that economic development would occur if only trade rules were suitably tailored, whereas benefits from trade depend most of all on a country's own economic policies and institutions.

When referring to the damage caused by EU, US and Japanese agricultural subsidies and protection of labour-intensive manufacturing (especially textiles and clothing), improved access would undoubtedly offer trade opportunities to many developing countries. However, when proposing more `special and differential treatment' for developing countries' exports and hence for their domestic development, the Oxfam authors neglect the low tariffs already levied on most other OECD imports. Moreover, economic research raises serious questions about the benefit of trade preferences to developing countries and whether the vested interests which are thus created impede further multilateral liberalization.

The catch-phrase `fair trade' used throughout the report can mean almost anything, and nowhere does Oxfam define what it means. `Fairness' is in the eye of the beholder! Moreover, the term `fair trade' has been captured by uncompetitive industries in developed countries to justify anti-dumping and other contingency protection.

Not unexpectedly, the authors rediscover the spectre of exploitation by multinational enterprises, which they want to be tamed by requiring OECD governments to 'enforce' internationally agreed guidelines on labour standards, foreign investment flows, income remittances, etc. None of these are specifically covered in WTO articles-and labour standards were specifically excluded from the WTO agenda at the Singapore Ministerial meeting! The report also resurrects the idea of international financial supports to stabilize commodity prices, ignoring their bad record in the 1970s, the moral hazard they introduce and the absence of WTO articles covering such schemes.

In this context, `fair trade' is really about income transfers to developing countries by indirect and inefficient processes, because the authors reject conventional analysis of benefits from trade (chapter 5). The case for free trade does not claim that the benefits will be distributed in ways consistent with perceptions of social equity or poverty alleviation, or according to any 'moral' interpretation. Welfare gains do occur from trade liberalization, however, and global economic interdependence has reduced poverty and inequality. On this topic the Oxfam report is deliberately evasive and even contradictory. Bleating about 'unfair' distribution does not require that gains from liberal trade should be sacrificed, only redistributed.

The verdict that the WTO is `indefensible' on moral and sustainability grounds (pages 4-5) raises serious doubts about the internal consistency of the report. Elsewhere (chapter 9), amendments to WTO rules are proposed that depend on the institution becoming stronger. How do the writers of this report believe that the world economy-- and poor, marginalized developing countries in particular-would have fared without GATT/WTO liberalization since 1948? This counter-factual position is not mentioned in the report. As noted above, some of the changes to the WTO proposed by Oxfam are unexceptionable to anyone concerned about economic development. This does not, however, mean that the changes will be easy to achieve. The institutional structure of the WTO, with negotiated liberalization and consensus decisions on rule changes, is easily manipulated to preserve the status quo. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Disappointing Monster
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.