Skip to main content

Abstract

The claim that the World Trade Organization is “undemocratic” starts from a basic fallacy. The WTO is not imposed on countries. Countries choose to belong to the WTO. No one is told to join. No one is forced to sign our agreements. Each and every one of the WTO’s rules is negotiated by Member governments, agreed by consensus, and ratified by parliaments. Countries choose to participate in an open, rules-based multilateral trading system for the simple reason that it is overwhelmingly in their interest to do so. The alternative is a less open, less prosperous, more uncertain world economy—an option few countries would willingly choose. It is difficult to conceive of a system that could be more democratic.

Mike Moore was Director-General of the World Trade Organization from 1999 to 2002. He has served as New Zealand Minister of Overseas Trade and Marketing (1984–1990), Minister of Foreign Affairs (1990), Deputy Minister of Finance (1988–1990) and Prime Minister (1990).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Members make decisions through numerous councils and committees, whose membership consists of all WTO members. Topmost is the ministerial conference, which has to meet at least once every two years. Since 1994, ministers have met in Singapore (1996), Switzerland (1998), the United States (1999), Qatar (2001) and Mexico (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jeffrey J. Schott, Institute for International Economics, Washington, quoted in WTO, Trading into the Future (April, 1999), at 63.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Claude E. Barfield, Free Trade, Sovereignty, Democracy 4 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Jr., The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and the World Trade Organization: Problems of Democratic Legitimacy, quoted in Barfield, supra note 10, at 100.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Martin Wolf, Will the Nation States Survive Globalization?, 80 Foreign Affairs 178, 189 (January/February 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Steve Charnovitz, Participation of Nongovernmental Organizations in the World Trade Organization, 17(1) University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law 331 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Martin Wolf, Uncivil Society: The Ill-Fated Multilateral Agreement on Investment Shows the Need to Confront the Claims of Pressure Groups Hostile to Globalisation, Financial Times, September 1, 1999, at 14.

    Google Scholar 

  8. UNDP, Human Development Report at 2 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  9. World Democracy Forum (2001).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Moore, M. (2005). The Democratic Roots of the World Trade Organization. In: Macrory, P.F.J., Appleton, A.E., Plummer, M.G. (eds) The World Trade Organization: Legal, Economic and Political Analysis. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-22688-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics