THE WTO AND THE DEVELOPMENT 
OF A GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY

  

BY ANNE E. DAWSON

THE WTO AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY


The World Trade Organization (WTO) is strongly rooted in the multilateral system-that is, a system comprising three or more states adhering to certain principles. The most fundamental of beliefs, maintained by virtually all of its members, is that the expansion of international trade flows benefits all states. It does not, therefore, seem incomprehensible that its ultimate goal is liberalized trade.

The durability and future success of this multilateral arrangement, however, depends on much more. It relies on the depth and relevance of its agenda, the ability to implement it, and the willingness of its participants to adhere to it. Beyond the convening of its members and the setting of a liberalized trade agenda, the power of the WTO is perhaps best illustrated in the world community itself. There would be no plan to stop acid rain if it were not for the global activism of concerned people. Similarly, activists have focused society's attention on the problems of the ozone depletion and global warming and have pursued negotiated acts even when major powers, including the United States, have been reluctant participants at best.

The international institutional order today has focused, primarily, on liberalizing trade in the areas of merchandise and services. However, the scale, structure, and regulatory framework of these areas have been changing rapidly. New problems, not specifically trade issues but rather ones definitely affecting the flow of trade, have arisen. They are of global proportions, with global implications and, therefore, command global treatment. Among these are food supply, energy supplies, environmental controls, and the protection of the oceans and forests. To a degree never existing before, all humans' lives and welfare are intertwined. This enigma requires resolution. The most appropriate instruments for this are a combination of controls, restraint, and cooperation among the individual members of the WTO. Any shift toward the expansion of the international trade agenda to include these non-traditional trade issues must be accompanied by the confidence that the new arrangements offer as many individual benefits as is now afforded by the current system. The world community will not evolve without the serious growing pains that accompany social and political change, but the WTO may be a useful conduit for channeling international cooperation.

It is my belief that the success of future development under the auspices of the WTO depends on the integration of the various political and social agendas. An important example of such a union is the interaction of trade and the environment. Given the fundamental connection that exists between the economy and natural resources, it seems impossible to consider one in isolation from the other. Without some form of coordination among national environmental policies, international environmental agreements, and international trade rules, both international trade and the environment stand to lose. It is, therefore, a major challenge to formulate rules for international trade and environmental policies which are compatible with the social goal of sustainable development.

One of the urgent issues that needs to be addressed when considering the field of environment is whether the WTO can and should allow the unilateral use of trade measures to protect natural and environmental resources outside a country's territorial jurisdiction. Would such an allowance undermine the organization, or would it simply transform it to accommodate the changes in trade? Many people maintain that by allowing such exceptions to the WTO disciplines, trade policy will degenerate into a system based on power rather than one of law.

Most people today, however, recognize that the worid no longer functions in a simple multilateral system. International trade has evolved into a global process in which the national identity of a company and its product's origin, among other things, are difficult to discern. Additionally, the focus of trade is no longer centered solely on merchandise and services. Instead, it has generally been recognized that internationaltrade is becoming increasingly interlinked with sustainable development. The difference, however, between trade in merchandise and services and trade relating to development is one of consequences.

Traditional trade has structured rules of interaction, whereas no general consensus on how to deal with trade and development has been reached. There is a certain amount of disagreement on the ways to integrate these two fields, especially regarding the questions on who should make the decisions and on which instruments to use. It seems apparent, however, that for the chaos of development to be contained there must be rules governing these non-trade issues. Consequently, there are many reasons for the WTO to expand its agenda. .

The questions proffered necessitate answers to one of the most challenging issues of the new millenium; how to ensure that development meets both the economic and social needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. I believe that it is abundantly clear that future decisions on international trade rules will have tremendous impact on the successful resolution of this dilemma. Consequently, the WTO's role in reaching a global position on these issues is paramount.

The required compromises that generally make the establishment of agreements strategically difficult may actually enhance their chances of enduring once in place. Successful arrangements in the past have exhibited certain expectations of reciprocity. -It
seems plausible, therefore, that so long as each party does not insist on being equally rewarded in every instance then trade-offs and bargains may make the expansion of the trade agenda feasible. Given the WTO framework for collaboration, given the recent negotiating successes in once-difficult sectors, and given the serious social incentives to collaborate, a more global civil society can be achieved.