New Powers and the Distribution of Preferences in Global Trade Governance: From Deadlock and Drift to Fragmentation

被引:20
作者
Stephen, Matthew D. [1 ]
Parizek, Michal [2 ]
机构
[1] WZB Berlin Social Sci Ctr, Dept Global Governance, Berlin, Germany
[2] Charles Univ Prague, Inst Polit Studies, Int Relat, Prague, Czech Republic
关键词
BRICS; Doha round; fragmentation; global governance; power shift; preferences; rising powers; World Trade Organization; GREAT-POWERS; DEVELOPING-COUNTRIES; HEGEMONIC STABILITY; DOMESTIC POLITICS; EMERGING POWERS; RISING POWERS; CHINA; WTO; INDIA; DOHA;
D O I
10.1080/13563467.2018.1509065
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Existing theories make divergent predictions about the impact of new powers on the global political economy. Some argue that a more even distribution of power will erode international cooperation, while others argue that cooperation can continue with the help of international institutions to overcome collective action problems. We argue that this debate overlooks a critical determinant of the shape of power transitions: the distribution of preferences amongst the major powers. It is primarily in the context of divergent preferences that power transitions are likely to give rise to conflict. Moreover, even where preferences diverge, the gains of cooperation provide a strong incentive to continue to pursue goals through multilateralism. This situation leads to forms of institutional change unanticipated by established theories. These include deadlock in expansive multilateral fora, institutional drift as old rules cannot keep up with the changing political and economic context, and fragmentation as countries seek minilateral solutions that reduce preference diversity. We develop this preference-based, institutional argument by examining the distribution of preferences and institutional change at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and its Doha Round, where the power transition is relatively advanced.
引用
收藏
页码:735 / 758
页数:24
相关论文
共 165 条
[1]   A Fragmenting Global Economy: A Weakened WTO, Mega FTAs, and Murky Protectionism [J].
Aggarwal, Vinod K. ;
Evenett, Simon J. .
SWISS POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2013, 19 (04) :550-557
[2]   The new diplomacy of the South: South Africa, Brazil, India and trilateralism [J].
Alden, C ;
Vieira, MA .
THIRD WORLD QUARTERLY, 2005, 26 (07) :1077-1095
[3]  
Alemani E., 2013, OECD EC DEP WORKING, V1104, DOI [10.1787/5k3ttg4r657h-en, DOI 10.1787/5K3TTG4R657H-EN]
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1980, NATL POWER STRUCTURE
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2015, The Hindu
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2016, New York Times
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2011, WTO ERSD-2011-05
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1987, Production, power, and world order: Social forces in the making of history
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2005, CONTINUITY I CHANGE
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2013, CHALLENGE, DOI DOI 10.2753/0577-5132560101