Search results

Originally an important but relatively obscure plurilateral instrument, the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) is now becoming a pillar of the WTO system as a result of important developments since the Uruguay Round. This collection examines the issues and challenges that this raises for the GPA, as well as future prospects for addressing government procurement at a multilateral level. Coverage includes issues relating to pending accessions to the GPA, particularly those of developing countries with a large state sector such as China; the revised (provisionally agreed) GPA text of 2006, including provisions on electronic procurement and Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries; and procurement provisions in regional trade agreements and their significance for the multilateral system. Attention is also given to emerging issues, especially those concerning environmental, social and SME policy; competition law; and the implications of the recent economic crisis

The WTO's plurilateral Agreement on Government Procurement ("the GPA" or "the Agreement") is an important ongoing success story for the Organization. In March 2012, the GPA Parties completed a comprehensive revision of the Agreement, encompassing both its text and coverage (market access commitments). The revised GPA, the negotiating processes that led to its adoption and coming into force, and the continuing gradual broadening of its membership are of therefore interest for the evolution of the international trading system. The GPA's successful renegotiation, the continuing growth of its membership and its vitality as an instrument of public policy were not achieved through happenstance. The paper discusses a number of specific design features of the GPA that clearly facilitated the successful conclusion of the renegotiation and that, as such, may in the future be relevant to other areas of global trade liberalization. In addition to the Agreement's plurilateral nature, of particular interest are the approach taken with respect to application of the most-favored-nation (MFN) principle in the Agreement; the GPA's continuing strong emphasis on principles of reciprocity in market access concessions; and its approach to special and differential treatment for developing countries, in all of which it differs from approaches that are widely used in other WTO Agreements. Apart from the above, the GPA revision is important for the merging of trade and good governance concerns that it exemplifies. As discussed in the paper, the themes of governance and the sound management of public resources that are treated in the revised Agreement were not afterthoughts to the renegotiation; rather, they permeated the revised text and received focused attention from the Parties in their own right. As well, the GPA has direct implications for investment policy and for domestic economic reforms, and is an important tool of e-commerce. And, the revision has made possible very significant synergies between the GPA and other international instruments and activities in reducing barriers to participation and strengthening governance in public procurement markets. For all these reasons, the revised Agreement is likely to have a wider impact than meets the eye, and well merits the support and attention that it has received from the participating WTO Member governments.

This paper examines the evolution of national competition (antitrust) policies and enforcement approaches vis-à-vis intellectual property rights (IPRs) and associated anti-competitive practices in major jurisdictions over the past several decades. It focuses especially on the underlying process of economic learning that has, the authors suggest, driven relevant policy changes. Part 2 of the paper outlines the breakthroughs in understanding that have underpinned the evolution of competition policy approaches toward intellectual property licensing arrangements in the US, Canada and the EU. Part 3 elaborates the foundational insights that have motivated competition policy interventions with respect to 'newer' issues such as anti-competitive patent settlements and hold-ups in relation to standard setting processes, in addition to the modern focus on mergers that potentially lessen incentives for innovation and on abuse of dominance/single firm exclusionary practices in IP-intensive network industries. Part 4 outlines some of the core policy concerns and insights driving the increased emphasis that leading competition authorities now devote to policy advocacy and research in relation to the scope and definition of IP rights. Overall, the analysis suggests, firstly, that competition policy applications in the intellectual property sphere are matters of fundamental importance for economic advancement and prosperity, having a direct bearing on innovation, growth and the diffusion of new technologies. Indeed, the roles of IP and competition policy are now sufficiently intertwined and interdependent that neither can be well understood or applied in an optimal fashion in the absence of the other. Secondly, the thought evolution described herein implies that successful policy applications require careful study of market structure and behaviour, not in the abstract but with reference to the particular markets affected. Thirdly, it augurs favourably for the prospects of continuing gradual and incremental convergence in national approaches in this area, even spanning developed and developing countries, on the basis of continual learning and informed self-interest.

This paper examines the role of competition law and policy as tools for poverty reduction and development. The authors put forward five related principles, building upon the important work on related issues that has been done by the OECD, the International Competition Network (ICN), UNCTAD and civil society organizations such as CUTS in recent years, in addition to the earlier work done on these topics in the WTO Working Group on the Interaction between Trade and Competition Policy when that body was active from 1997 through 2003. Together, these principles comprise the holistic approach to competition law and policy which is referenced in the title of the paper: * First, the focus of policy makers in using competition policy as tool for poverty reduction should be on approaches that are relatively easy to implement but have a trackrecord of being effective and economically sound. * Second, for competition policy reforms and legislation to be successful, public acceptance and support is critical and must be an essential focus of related initiatives. * Third, to serve as an effective tool of poverty reduction, competition policy needs to address the needs of the citizens of poorer societies in their capacities as producers (and, therefore, as users of extensive input goods and services, including public infrastructure), in addition to their capacities as final consumers/households. * Fourth, it is posited that competition policy is more than just what competition agencies do and includes the full spectrum of measures that governments employ to enhance competition and improve the performance of markets. * Fifth, in order to address the challenges posed by the changing landscape of competition policy worldwide, new forms of international co-operation may need to be considered. The paper then develops the application of these principles with respect to five specific areas in which competition policy can contribute to poverty reduction, namely: (i) the reform of public and business infrastructure sectors, particularly in the context of developing and transition economies; (ii) the complementary roles of competition law enforcement and market liberalization in public procurement markets; (iii) various related dimensions of competition policy as they relate to public health objectives; (iv) the addressing of possible monopsonistic practices in international supply chains that may affect the ability of developing country producers to reap gains from participation in international markets; and (v) measures to address the enduring problem of international cartels which, despite an impressive record of prosecutions by developed jurisdiction competition agencies over the past decade, continue to impose substantial costs on developing economies. The paper concludes with some observations regarding the future of international cooperation in the competition policy sphere.

This Working Paper considers the significance of government procurement chapters in regional trade agreements (RTAs), both in their own right and vis-à-vis the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). The paper finds, inter alia, that: (i) a strong complementarity exists between government procurement trade commitments and general goods and services trade commitments, making integration of procurement commitments in a more general system such as the WTO Agreements desirable; (ii) government procurement chapters in RTAs, where they exist in detailed form, are modelled substantially or entirely on the WTO GPA – a fact which can facilitate eventual accession to the GPA by participating WTO Members; and (iii) the market access opportunities created by government procurement chapters in RTAs generally are less extensive than those available under the revised GPA - a factor helping to maintain incentives for eventual GPA accession by relevant WTO Members. The recent successful renegotiation of the GPA has set the stage for a broadening of its membership, over time, ensuring that the Agreement's future remains strong.