The maintenance and strengthening of the multilateral trading system

The multilateral trading system centered on the World Trade Organization (WTO) is seen as an international public good (in the strictest terms, a club well), which has the characteristics of non-exclusion and non-rivalry in the consumption, but the current system is criticized by people in various fields. The multilateral trading system orthodoxy (based on the concept of comparative advantage and public choice) is in crisis because of the continuing protests in society and criticism of the current system of developing countries.

Civil society groups protest that trade liberalization was promoted at the expense of the global environment and a disproportionate emphasis on the profits of multinational corporations widens the gap between rich and poor resulting from meetings behind closed doors that 's is held in Geneva, where trade faceless bureaucrats to make important decisions. The governments of developing countries have begun to adopt a negative attitude toward the new round of negotiations, arguing that, ultimately, it was only developed countries that have benefited from the Uruguay Round, and they demand the equitable application of existing agreements before starting new negotiations for further liberalisation. These critics increasingly severe were the main reasons for the failure of the Seattle Ministerial Conference in December 1999. It was decided that a new round of negotiations would start at the ministerial conference in Doha in 2001, but no agreement has been concluded at the ministerial conference in Cancun in September 2003, which was regarded as the review conference mid-term for negotiations, etc. Negotiations once again ran into trouble. An agreement was reached at a meeting of senior officials in Geneva in July 2004 to relaunch negotiations and preparations for the ministerial conference in 2005 in Hong Kong began, but progress in the negotiations can not be assured.

The Doha Round negotiations are continuing at this time, but the crisis of the orthodoxy of the WTO remains. In addition to the negotiations, it was felt that the automatic and effectiveness of the dispute settlement procedures will be compared to the stagnation and inefficiency of the negotiations, and if the difference is not remedied, WTO Orthodoxy crisis will grow. An investigation into the dispute settlement procedures under way reveals that the Appellate Body judicial activism avoided as much as possible, and that the majority of countries deemed in violation of WTO agreements to accept the recommendations of the WTO and change their steps to comply with the WTO agreements. For this reason, it is believed that the discontent expressed by the country against the dispute settlement procedures have not reached a level such that it is impossible to control.

Ten years have passed since the creation of the WTO, and despite the difficulties of the multilateral trade system as an international public good has been maintained, so that it can be assumed that those countries are still trying to maintain and strengthen the WTO.

Japan temporarily joined the GATT in 1953 and became a contracting party in 1955. This means that when Japan joined the international economy after the Second World War, the multilateral trading system centered on the GATT was already in place, which has always been the Japanese government officials feel as if they had been delayed and it took a considerable period of time until Japan became capable of using the GATT rules as a political means. However, since then, Japanese trade policy has improved to the point where it is called aggressive legalism that uses the WTO rules. Now, the Japanese will be assessed value on the positive contribution how Japan can do to maintain and strengthen the multilateral trading system and to make the system more reliable in the context of the Doha Round negotiations.

If Japanese measures for the contributions are assessed on the basis of the three aspects of the financial contribution to the budget of the WTO, the provision of human resources for the Secretariat staff and the use of dispute settlement procedures, contributions will be are not in circulation. In the long and medium term measures to break the current impasse is needed.