![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
It has been recognised that the process of multilateral trade negotiations has been fundamentally altered by the increased involvement of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) since the Uruguay Round. NGOs have helped to increase the voice of the developing world, nullify some of the asymmetries in political power vis-à-vis the rich world, and provide trade analysis to bolster participation. What is less recognised is the growing importance of certain international governmental organisations (IGOs) that provide demand driven advocacy through the provision of knowledge and expertise to developing states that, at times, challenges the dominant neoliberal agenda at the WTO. Unlike NGOs, many of these organisations are able to hold observer status on WTO committees and write member state submissions. Yet, ideologically and in terms of their specific capacity-building functions, these organisations are also distinct from other IGOs operating in the area of global trade. Through everyday actions, ‘insider’ IGOs such as the South Centre and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development undertake work that redresses imbalances of power in global economic governance and transforms the ‘common sense’ underlying trade practices. In this paper, we develop a set of ideal types aimed at unpacking and illuminating the variegated degrees and types of ‘resistance’ exercised within the international trade system.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for generously funding this research. We are also grateful to Rorden Wilkinson and Amy Wood for their valuable input on earlier drafts of this article, and to three anonymous reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped strengthen the arguments. Responsibility for any errors nonetheless resides with us.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. These are paragraphs 5–8, 11, 13–15 and 28.
2. For example, lower reductions in subsidy bindings for those members that have initially lower subsidy levels will benefit developing countries since the major developed countries do not fall into this category, but these provisions make no mention of SDT. As such it is a matter of judgement or opinion as to whether these are a form of SDT.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Erin Hannah
Erin Hannah is an associate professor of political science at King's University College at the University of Western Ontario. Her research focuses on global trade, sustainable development, global governance and global civil society. She is the author of NGOs and Global Trade: Non-State Voices in EU Trade Policymaking (Routledge, 2016) and co-editor (with Silke Trommer and James Scott) of Expert Knowledge in Global Trade (Routledge, 2015).
Holly Ryan
Holly Eva Ryan is a senior lecturer in politics and international relations at Manchester Metropolitan University. Her research sits at the intersections of international politics, social movement studies and aesthetics. She is the author of Political Street Art: Communication, Culture and Resistance in Latin America (Routledge Research in Place, Space and Politics Series, 2016).
James Scott
James Scott is a lecturer in international politics in the Department of Political Economy at King's College London. He works primarily on trade governance, particularly with regard to developing countries in the WTO, and on the impact of rising powers on the trade system. His work has been published in numerous journals, including New Political Economy, World Trade Review, Journal of World Trade and Global Governance. His latest book is Expert Knowledge in Global Trade, co-edited with Erin Hannah and Silke Trommer (2015).