Misconceptions of the World Trade Organization

Singer outlines four commonly made charges against the World Trade Organization (WTO) that critics use to show that globalization is failing. The first charge is that the WTO places economic considerations ahead of concerns for the environment, animal welfare, and even human rights. The second charge is that the WTO erodes national sovereignty. The third charge is that the WTO is undemocratic. The fourth charge is that the WTO increases inequality or it makes the rich richer and leaves the world’s poorest people even worse off than they would otherwise have been. Singer presents evidence that most of these charges seem to have some validity to them, however the underlying issue seems to be the structure of the WTO.
Theoretically trade has the ability to expand each country’s GDP through comparative advantage. That is that each country specializes in producing the good in which their relative advantage is to other countries. According to Singer this type of trading has been estimated to increase Japan’s real income by 65 percent. However with this type of global trading changing the way labor and capital markets function, barriers are often put up by countries to protect young industries and products or labor that are needed to produce fruitful life for their citizens, often with the negative effects of higher consumer prices. Barriers are what cause organizations such as the World Trade Organization to have to be in place in order to promote free and fair trade. However most often, fair trade is out of the question and as Singer shows there are many problems with how the WTO conducts business.
Many of the WTO’s problems evolve from its structure. Rather then set up like a global government where countries are represented in a voting structure it is set up similar to a town meeting where consensus must be reached in order for things to occur. However just like many town meetings, the more wise and experienced have more influence and therefore direct policy; just as the major, highest income countries control much of the lobbying and policy direction. Singer does a very good job of showing how this proves the third charge to be correct. Due to this structure the WTO rules make it seem and historically have shown that economic considerations have been placed ahead of concerns for the environment. This is because of rules that essentially state that a country cannot stop trade due to unacceptable practices if in the country that erects the barrier is still practicing that practiced. I know that sounds a little confusing but that is the WTO for you.
The WTO might not be the answer but in order to find a solution one of two things must occur. Either there must be a stronger international regulatory agency to promote free and fair trade as well as protect the environment, that is recognized by all countries; or their must be a restructuring of the WTO to include environmental concern aspects as well as well as a coalition with the IMF to encourage foreign direct investment in developing countries so that they have the technology to successfully trade and not be left behind by trade. For it could be that the only thing holding back developing countries is the lack of technology preventing them from trading successfully.