Perdida na (des)globalização? À procura das causas da perda de relevância da OMC
1 ISCET – High Institute of Business and Tourism Sciences, Porto, Portugal
To cite this text:
Fernandes, J. P. T. (2020), Perdida na (des)globalização? À procura das causas da perda de relevância da OMC, Percursos & Ideias, Vol. 10, pp. 73-86.
The main purpose of this article is to try to answer the following question: what happened to the World Trade Organization (WTO) which today seems to have an increasingly smaller role in global trade? For this purpose, a short exploratory analysis was carried out based on a qualitative methodology trough documentary research and the use, albeit selective, of the literature on the subject. Additionally, it was also used an empirical study, the KOF globalization index. The approach to the subject was structured in several points. The first one was the contemporary commercial system. The second was the transformation of an initial optimism into disbelief due to the failure of the Doha Round. The third point was the decision-making at the WTO and the system for resolving trade disputes. Finally, the contradictory trends of globalization and deglobalization are addressed. The approach is concluded with brief reflections on the future of the WTO and topics for further research are also being pointed out.
WTO, International trade, Dispute settlement, Deglobalization, Geopolitics.
BELLO, Walden (2005), Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy, London: Zed.
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS (2019), “United States Continues to Block New Appellate Body Members for the World Trade Organization, Risking the Collapse of the Appellate Process”, in American Journal of International Law, 113(4), pp. 822-831, [Consult. a 10.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/united-states-continues-to-block-new-appellate-body-members-for-the-world-trade-organization-risking-the-collapse-of-the-appellate-process/EF3F564A66D3CDE698A9DFFF8FAEF77C
EUROPEAN COMMISSION / TRADE (s/d), Negotiations and agreements [Consult. a 18.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreements/
____, EU negotiating texts in TTIP, 22/04/2020 [Consult. a 18.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1230
FERNANDES, José Pedro Teixeira (2013), Elementos de Economia Política Internacional, 2ª ed., Coimbra: Almedina.
____ (2018), “Jogos com fronteiras: o regresso do proteccionismo e do mercantilismo”, in Percursos & Ideias (Cadernos de Comércio Internacional), nº 8, 2ª série, pp. 55-62.
FINANCIAL TIMES (2015), “The Doha round finally dies a merciful death”, in Financial Times, 21 de Dezembro de 2015 [Consult. a 04.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://www.ft.com/content/9cb1ab9e-a7e2-11e5-955c-1e1d6de94879
GRUPO DE LISBOA (1994), Limites à Competição, Lisboa, Publicações Europa-América.
GYGLI, Savina; HAELG, Florian; POTRAFKE, Niklas; STURM, Jan-Egbert (2019), “The KOF Globalisation Index – Revisited”, in Review of International Organizations, 14(3), pp. 543-574 [Consult. a 29.12.2019]. Disponível em: https://academic.oup.com/cjres/article/11/1/59/4821285
KOF Swiss Economic Institute (2019), KOF Globalisation Index: Weaker World Trade Slowing Globalisation, Press release, 23 de Outubro [Consult. a 29.12.2019]. Disponível em: https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/media/press-releases/2019/10/weaker-world-trade-slowing-globalisation.html
KUCIK, Jeffrey (2018), “Why Trump’s wrong about WTO treating US unfairly” in The Conversation, 04/09/2018 [Consult. a 12.04.2020]. Disponível em: http://theconversation.com/why-trumps-wrong-about-wto-treating-us-unfairly-102562
LAÏDI, Zaki (2008), “How trade become geopolitics”, in World Policy Journal, Summer [Consult. a 19.12.2019]. Disponível em: http://www.laidi.com/comment/summer2008.pdf
RESOLUÇÃO DA ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA n.º 75-B/94 (2.ª Parte), Acto Final, que consagra os resultados das negociações comerciais multilaterais do Uruguay Round [Consult. a 07.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://dre.pt/application/file/a/234013
RODRIK, Dani (2017), Straight Talk on Trade: Ideas for a Sane World Economy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press [Consult. a 30.12.2019]. Disponível em: http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/s11216.pdf (capítulo 1)
SCHOTT, Jeffrey J.; JUNG, Euijin (2019) “In US-China Trade Disputes, the WTO Usually Sides with the United States” in Trade and Investment Policy Watch / Peterson Institute of International Economics, 12 de Março [Consult. a 30.12.2019]. Disponível em: https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/us-china-trade-disputes-wto-usually-sides-united-states
US TRADE REPRESENTATIVE (s/d), Trade Agreements, TPP full text [Consult. a 18.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text
VAN BERGEIJK, Peter A.G. (2018). “On the brink of Deglobalisation … again”, in Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Vol. 11(2), pp. 59-72 [Consult. a 29.12.2019]. Disponível em: https://academic.oup.com/cjres/article/11/1/59/4821285
VAN BERGEIJK, P. A. G.; MOONS, Selwyn J. V. [eds] (2017) Research Handbook of Economic Diplomacy, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
WORLD TRADE REVIEW (s/d), Reporters’ Studies of WTO Case Law from World Trade Review, publicado pela Cambridge University Press [Consult. a 07.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-trade-review/information/reporters-studies-of-wto-case-law-from-world-trade-review
WTO (s/d), Appellate Body Members [Consult. a 10.04.2020]. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/ab_members_descrp_e.htm
____ (s/d), WTO legal texts [Consult. a 27.12.2019]. Disponível em: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm