WTO Working Papers

The EU's import policies towards developing countries are complex, stemming from important sectoral and country variations in policy. Average tariffs are modest, and, while there are tariff peaks and escalation in some areas of interest to developing countries, these are being reduced as a result of the implementation of the results of the Uruguay Round. The use of non-tariff measures has fallen, particularly as a result of agricultural tariffication, and is being further reduced in textiles and clothing. The elimination of VERs has not led to an increase in the use of alternative measures. Contingency protection falls more heavily in chemicals, iron and steel, certain textile items and certain electrical consumer goods and on Asian, Central and Eastern European and former Soviet Union countries. The operation of various factors appears to be working to mitigate the use of trade defence measures in recent years, helping to counter pressures that seem likely to arise as liberalization proceeds.

This paper is concerned with three problems in the interpretation of the national treatment obligation in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). First, the precise domain of Article XVII on national treatment has not been clearly delineated, particularly in relation to Article XVI dealing with market access. Secondly, there is a difference between the text of Article XVII and the structure of the schedules of commitments, which makes it difficult to interpret the scope of the national treatment obligation even for identical services supplied through different modes. The final, and most complex, problem arises in establishing the definition of "like" services and "like" service suppliers. Uncertainty about the precise meaning of the national treatment obligation may undermine the key GATS objective of creating a secure, predictable trading environment. Moreover, the extent of liberalization implied by the commitments under GATS depends on the precise choice of interpretation.

The objective of this paper is to assess the adequacy of multilateral rules dealing with monopolies and state enterprises, particularly in the domain of services. This paper argues that since these rules depend largely on the other obligations undertaken by Members, a variety of exemptions and exclusions have weakened the rules considerably. Furthermore, liberalization of services trade, aided by negotiations under the GATS, is leading to changes in market structure and the pattern of ownership. These changes imply that government-mandated monopolies or non-competing oligopolies are disappearing from the infrastructural services for which Article VIII of GATS is most relevant. The behaviour of dominant suppliers that often remain does not fall within the scope of Article VIII and has been addressed by creating other disciplines. The paper assesses how much emphasis needs to be placed on pro-competitive regulation to ensure competitive market conditions and argues that there is a need to strengthen Article VIII and widen its scope to deal with certain generic problems.