Power, knowledge and resistance: between co-optation and revolution in global trade

References

• Abu-Lughod, L. (1990) ‘The romance of resistance: tracing transformations of power through Bedouin women’, American Ethnologist 17(1): 41–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler, E. and Bernstein, S. (2005) ‘Knowledge in power: the epistemic construction of global governance’, in M. Barnett and R. Duvall (eds) Power in Global Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 294–318.
   Google Scholar
• Alter, K. and Meunier, S. (2009) ‘The politics of international regime complexity’, Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 13–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker, C., Cox, L., Krinsky, J. and Nilsen, A. G. (eds) (2013) Marxism and Social Movements, Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Bello, W. (2000) ‘UNCTAD: time to lead, time to challenge the WTO’, in K. Danher and R. Burbach (eds) Globalize This! The Battle against the World Trade Organization and Corporate Rule, Monroe: Common Courage Press, pp. 163–74.
   Google Scholar
• Bernal, L. (2005) ‘Methodology for identification of special products (SP) and products for eligibility under the special safeguard mechanism (SSM) by developing countries’, ICTSD Project on Special Products and SSM, Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• Bilal, S., Lomaerde, P. and Tussie, D. (eds) (2011) Asymmetric Trade Negotiations, Farnham: Ashgate Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Bond, P. (2003) South Africa Meets the World Bank, IMF and International Finance, London and New York, NY: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee, P. and Finger, M. (1994) The Earth Brokers: Power, Politics, and World Development, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chorev, N. (2012) ‘Changing global norms through reactive diffusion: the case of intellectual property protection of AIDS drugs’, American Sociological Review 77(5): 831–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chorev, N. (2013) ‘Restructuring neoliberalism at the World Health Organization’, Review of International Political Economy 20(4): 627–666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, R. W. (1983) ‘Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: an essay in method’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 12(2): 162–75.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, R. W. (1999) ‘Civil society at the turn of the millennium: prospects for an alternative world order’, Review of International Studies 25(1): 3–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crane, G. T. and A. Amawi (eds) (1997) The Theoretical Evolution of International Political Economy: A Reader, New York, NY; Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, C. (2009) ‘Overlapping institutions in trade policy’, Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 25–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• della Porta, D. (2015) Social Movements in Times of Austerity: Bringing Capitalism Back into Protest Analysis, Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drache, D. and Froese, M. (eds) (2008) Defiant Publics: The Unprecedented Reach of the Global Citizen, Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eagleton-Pierce, M. (2015) ‘Symbolic power and social critique in the making of Oxfam's trade policy research’, in E. Hannah, J. Scott and S. Trommer (eds) Expert Knowledge in Global Trade, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Eagleton-Pierce, M. (2016) Neoliberalism: The Key Concepts, Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, M. and Hulme D. (1996) ‘Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations’, World Development 24(6): 961–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO (2002) ‘A special agricultural safeguard (SAS): buttressing the market access reforms of developing countries’, FAO Papers on Selected Issues Relating to the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture. Commodities and Trade Division, Rome.
   Google Scholar
• FAO (2005) ‘A special safeguard mechanism for developing countries’, FAO Policy Briefs on Issues Related to the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture: No. 9, Rome.
   Google Scholar
• Finger, M. and Magarinos-Ruchat, B. (2003) ‘The transformation of international public organizations’, in D. Dijkzeul and Y. Beigbeder (eds) Rethinking International Organizations: Pathology and Promise, New York, NY; Oxford: Berghahn Books, pp. 140–65.
   Google Scholar
• Gehring, T. (2011) ‘The institutional complex of trade and environment: toward an interlocking governance structure and a division of labor’, in S. Oberthür and O. Schram Stokke (eds) Managing Institutional Complexity. Regime Interplay and Global Environmental Change, Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press, pp. 227–54.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, M. (2000) ‘The positive agenda and the Seattle conference’, in UNCTAD (ed) A Positive Agenda for Developing Countries: Issues for Future Trade Negotiations, Geneva: UNCTAD, pp. 1–72.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, S. (2000) ‘Toward a postmodern prince? The battle in Seattle as a moment in the new politics of globalisation’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 29(1): 131–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gramsci, A. (1958) The Modern Prince and Other Writings, New York, NY: New World Paperbacks.
   Google Scholar
• Green, D. and Priyadarshi, S. (2001) ‘Proposal for a “development box” in the WTO agreement on agriculture’, FAO Discussion Paper No. 3, Rome.
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths, M., Roach, S. C. and Solomon, M. S. (2009) Fifty Key Thinkers in International Relations, London; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, F. (2000) ‘Getting real about Seattle’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 29(1): 123–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, A. (1791) ‘Report on the subject of manufactures’, accessed at http://www.constitution.org/ah/rpt_manufactures.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, E. (2014) ‘The quest for inclusive and accountable governance: embedded NGOs and demand driven advocacy in the international trade regime’, Journal of World Trade 48(3): 457–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannah, E. (2016) NGOs and Global Trade: Non-State Voices in EU Trade Policymaking, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, E. and Scott, J. (2015) ‘Rethinking NGOs in global trade’, Paper presented at the Global South Caucus of the International Studies Association, Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, E. and Scott, J. (2017) ‘From Palais de Nations to Centre William Rappard: prebisch and UNCTAD as sources of ideas in the GATT/WTO’, in M. Margulis (ed) The Global Political Economy of Raúl Prebisch, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, E., Scott, J. and Trommer, S. (eds) (2015) Expert Knowledge in Global Trade, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hannah, E., Scott, J. and Wilkinson, R. (2017) ‘Reforming WTO-civil society engagement’, World Trade Review. doi:10.1017/S1474745616000446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopewell, K. (2015) ‘Multilateral trade governance as social field: global civil society and the WTO’, Review of International Political Economy 22(6): 1128–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICTSD. (2005) ‘Special products and the special safeguard mechanism: strategic options for developing countries’, Issue Paper 6, Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• ICTSD. (2007) ‘The special safeguard mechanism: findings from a simulation exercise’, Information Note: Number 2, Geneva.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R. O. and Victor, D. G. (2011) ‘The regime complex for climate change’, Perspectives on Politics 9(1): 7–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lafferty, G. (2000) ‘The dynamics of change: class, politics and civil society – from Marx to post-Marxism’, Democracy & Nature 6(1): 19–26.
   Google Scholar
• Lichbach, M. I. and de Vries, H. G. (2004) ‘Global justice and antiwar movements: from local resistance to globalized protests’, unpublished manuscript, Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
   Google Scholar
• List, F. (1841) Das nationale System der politischen Oekonomie [The National System of Political Economy], London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Mably, P. (2009) ‘Centralized production: the group of 33’, in D. Tussie (ed) The Politics of Trade: The Role of Research in Trade Policy and Negotiation, Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, pp. 239–72.
   Google Scholar
• Margulis, M. (2013) ‘The regime complex for food security: Implications for the global hunger challenge’, Global Governance 19(1): 53–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margulis, M. (ed) (2017). The Global Political Economy of Prebisch, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Meunier, S. (2011) ‘Overlapping institutions in trade policy’, Perspectives on Politics 7(1): 25–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, D. S. and Staggenbourg, S. (1996) ‘Movements, countermovements, and the structure of political opportunity’, The American Journal of Sociology 101(6): 1628–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montemayor, R. (2007) ‘Implications of proposed modalities for the Special Safeguard Mechanism: A simulation exercise’, ICTSD Issue Paper 10, Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Montemayor, R. (2008) ‘How will the May 2008 “Modalities” text affect access to the special safeguard mechanism, and the effectiveness of additional safeguard duties’, ICTSD Issue Paper 15, Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Montemayor, R. (2016) ‘Safeguarding poor farmers from import surges: towards a “middle ground?”’, ICTSD Opinion and Analysis, 14 July; accessed at http://www.ictsd.org/opinion/safeguarding-poor-farmers-from-import-surges-towards-a-middle-ground
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, C. and Yates, J. (2009) The International Organisation of Standardisation: Global Governance through Voluntary Consensus, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, H. (2010) The Making of International Trade Policy: NGOs, Agenda-Setting and the WTO, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Orsini, A., Morin, J.-F. and Young, O. (2013) ‘Regime complexes: a buzz, a boom, or a bust for global governance?’, Global Governance 19(1): 27–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyejide, T. A. (2002) ‘Special and differential treatment’, in B. M. Hoekman, A. Mattoo and P. English (eds) Development, Trade, and the WTO: A Handbook. Vol. 1, Washington, DC: World Bank Publications, pp. 504–8.
   Google Scholar
• Paterson, B. (2009) ‘Transformismo at the WTO’, in M. McNally and J. Schwarzmatel (eds) Gramsci and Global Politics: Hegemony and Resistance, Abingdon; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Peet, R. (2003) Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO, London; New York, NY: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Polanyi, K. (1944) The Great Transformation: Economic and Political Origins of Our Time, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, A. (2014) The NGO-ization of Resistance, accessed at: http://massalijn.nl/new/the-ngo-ization-of-resistance/
   Google Scholar
• Ruggie, J. G. (1982) ‘International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order’, International Organization 36(2): 379–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shafaeddin, M. (2000) ‘What did Frederick list actually say? Some clarifications on the infant industry argument’, UNCTAD Discussion Paper 149, unctad.org/en/docs/dp_149.en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Scholte, J. A. (2005) Globalization: A critical introduction, New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Scholte, J. A., O'Brien, R. and Williams, M. (1998) ‘The WTO and civil society’, Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation Working Paper No.14/98, University of Warwick.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, J.-P. (2017) Sweet Talk: Paternalism and Collective Action in North-South Trade Relations, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre (2003) ‘Proposals on a special safeguard for developing countries in agriculture’, South Centre Analytical Note, SC/TADP/AN/AG/5.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre (2009a) The Proposed Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) in the WTO: is it still special? South Centre Analytical Note (draft), Geneva: South Centre.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre (2009b) ‘Comparing the special safeguard provision (SSG) and the special safeguard mechanism (SSM): special and differential treatment for whom?’, South Centre Analytical Note, SC/TDP/AN/AG/11, November.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre (2014) ‘South centre’, accessed at: http://www.southcentre.int.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre (2015a) ‘About’, The South Centre Blog, accessed at: http://blog.southcentre.int/about/.
   Google Scholar
• South Centre. (2015b) ‘WTO's MC10: agriculture negotiations - special safeguard in agriculture for developing countries’, South Centre Analytical Note, SC/TDP/AN/MC10/2, December.
   Google Scholar
• Strange, M. (2013) Writing Global Trade Governance: Discourse and the WTO, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Tarrow, S. (2005) ‘The dualities of transnational contention:" Two activist solitudes" or a new world altogether?’, Mobilization 10(1): 53–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, I. (2003) ‘The United Nations conference on trade and development’, New Political Economy 8(3): 409–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, I. and Smith, K. (2007) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), London; New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Trommer, S. (2014) Transformations in Trade Politics: Participatory Trade Politics in West Africa, London; New York, NY; Florence, KY: Routledge; Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, K. (2014) ‘Participation and subjectification in global governance: NGOs, acceptable subjectivities and the WTO’, Millennium – Journal of International Studies 42(2): 376–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UN (1964) Towards a New Trade Policy for Development, Report by the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, New York, NY: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (1997) The Uruguay Round and its Follow-Up: Building a Positive Agenda for Development, UNCTAD/ITCD/TED/2, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (2000) A Positive Agenda for Developing Countries: Issues for Future Trade Negotiations, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (2011) ‘Reflections on a future trade facilitation agreement: implementation of WTO obligations. A comparison of existing WTO provisions’, UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/2010/2, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (2012) Trade and Development Report, 2012: Three Decades of Thinking Development, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (2014) Trade and Development Report, 2014: Global Governance and Policy Space for Development, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UNCTAD (2015). Rethinking Development Strategies after the Global Financial Crisis. Volume I: Making the Case for Policy Space, Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• UN General Assembly (1974) Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly 3201 (S-VI), Declaration on the establishment of a New International Economic Order, A/RES/S-6/3201, New York, NY: UN.
   Google Scholar
• Valdes, A and Foster, W. (2005) The New SSM: A Price Floor Mechanism for Developing Countries, Geneva: ICTSD.
   Google Scholar
• Vinthagen, S. and Johansson, A. (2013) ‘“Everyday Resistance”: exploration of a concept and its theories’, Resistance Studies Magazine 1: 1–46.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, T. G., Carayannis, T. and Jolly, R. (2009) ‘The “third” United Nations’, Global Governance 15(1): 123–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, T. G., and Wilkinson, R. (2014) ‘Rethinking global governance? Complexity, authority, power, change’, International Studies Quarterly 58(1): 207–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R. (2014) What's wrong with the WTO and how to fix it, Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R., Hannah, E., and Scott, J. (2014) ‘The WTO in Bali: what MC9 means for the Doha development agenda and why it matters’, Third World Quarterly 35(6): 1032–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R., Hannah, E. and Scott, J. (2016) ‘The WTO in Nairobi: the demise of the Doha development agenda and the future of the multilateral trading system’, Global Policy 7(2): 247–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, R. (2009) ‘The special safeguard fiasco in the WTO: the perils of inadequate analysis and negotiation’, World Trade Review 8(4): 517–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WTO (1999) ‘The challenges of integrating LDCs into the multilateral trade system’, WT/GC/W/251, 13 July.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2001) ‘Doha WTO ministerial declaration’, WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1. 20 November.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2004) ‘Doha work programme’, decision adopted by the general council, Annex D, WT/L/579’, 1 August.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2005a) ‘Doha work programme revision’, Draft Ministerial Declaration WT/MIN(05)/W/3/Rev.2, 17.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2005b) ‘G33 proposal on special safeguard measures–communication from G33’, Committee on Agriculture, Special Session, JOB(05)/92, 3 June.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2005c) ‘G-33 proposal on Article 5 […] special safeguard provisions mechanism for developing countries’, Committee on Agriculture, Special Session, JOB(05)/263, 27 October.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2008a) ‘Fourth revision of draft modalities for non-agricultural market access’, TN/MA/W/103/Rev.3, 6 December.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2008b) ‘Revised draft modalities for agriculture’, TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4, 6 December.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2010a) ‘Refocusing discussions on the special safeguard mechanism (SSM): outstanding issues and concerns on its design and structure’, Submission by the G33 to the Committee on Agriculture: Special Session, TN/AG/GEN/30, 28 January.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2010b) ‘Issues and concerns on the price-based special safeguard mechanism: some analysis and technical contributions for the design and structure’, Communication by the G33 to the Committee on Agriculture: Special Session, JOB/AG/5/Rev.1, 11 February.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2010c) ‘G33 submission on the SSM: seasonality’, Communication by the G33 to the Committee on Agriculture: Special Session, JOB/AG/4, 5 February.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2013) ‘G33 textual proposal on special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for the post-Bali work programme’, Committee on Agriculture – Special Session, Job/AG/29, 17 July.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2015a) ‘Submission of Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group: LDC priorities for the WTO tenth Ministerial Conference in the Doha Development Agenda’, JOB/TNC/56, 3 November.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2015b) ‘Declaration of the African Union informal ministerial meeting on the tenth WTO Ministerial Conference’, WTO/MIN(15)/4, 5 November.
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2015c) ‘Special safeguard mechanism for developing country members’, Submission by the G33, Committee on Agriculture, Job/AG/49; WT/MIN(15)/W/19, 19 October .
   Google Scholar
• WTO (2015d) ‘Safeguard mechanism for developing country members’, Ministerial Decision, WT/MIN(15)/43 – WT/L/978, 19 December.
   Google Scholar
• Yu, P. (2007) ‘International enclosure, the regime complex, and intellectual property schizophrenia’, Michigan State Law Review 1: 1–33.
   Google Scholar