
Contents
> Director-General’s
letter to journalists
> Background
> Least-developed
countries (LDCs)
> Agriculture
> Sanitary
and phytosanitary (SPS) measures
> Trade
in services
> Implementation
issues
> Intellectual
property (TRIPS)
> Textiles
and clothing
> Information
technology (IT) products
> Trade
and environment
> Trade
and investment
> Trade
and competition policy
> Transparency
in government procurement
> Trade
facilitation
> Trade
and labour standards
> Disputes
> Electronic
commerce
> Members
and accession
> Regional
trade agreements
> Some
facts and figures
> Glossary
of terms
|

Since 1997, WTO members have been engaged in analysis and debate about
the relationship between international trade and investment, and its
implications for economic growth and development. In the Working Group
on the Relationship between Trade and Investment, members have
examined a range of international investment instruments and existing
agreements, and have debated the possible pros and cons of negotiating
a multilateral framework of investment rules in the WTO. UNCTAD has
played an important role in this analytical process, particularly in
helping WTO delegations better understand the development dimension of
this subject.
The
WTO already has limited provisions on certain trade aspects of foreign
investment. The Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)
elaborates on existing GATT provisions prohibiting government
requirements for investors to purchase inputs locally or to sell their
output domestically rather than exporting it. The General Agreement on
Trade in Services (GATS) has rules relating to the establishment by a
foreign service supplier of a “commercial presence” in an overseas
market.
But
the main way in which rules are applied to FDI at present is through
government-to-government Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). UNCTAD
estimates over 1,700 BITs are in operation today, along with around
1,900 double taxation treaties. Historically, most of these treaties
were signed between developed and developing countries but recently,
the number of BITs among developing countries has been increasing.
For
the Doha Ministerial, a number of developed and developing WTO members
are supporting proposals—similar to those tabled at the Seattle
Ministerial—-recommending that a decision be taken to begin
negotiating a WTO agreement on foreign direct investment (FDI). They
argue that the existing international regime of individual BITs plus
regional investment agreements lead to confusion. They say that a WTO
agreement would establish a stable, non-discriminatory environment
that would increase investment flows.
These
members have made it clear that the agreement they are proposing to
negotiate in the WTO bears no relationship to the OECD’s
Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI)— in the WTO, negotiations
would start from a blank sheet of paper.
At
the same time, many developing countries have made it clear that they
are opposed to negotiation on this subject in the WTO, at least for
the time being, and prefer to continue the analysis and study in the
Working Group. They argue that the existing BITs already provide
adequate legal protection to investors, and question whether a WTO
agreement would indeed increase investment flows. They have expressed
concern that a multilateral agreement would add obligations to
developing countries while limiting their ability to align investment
inflows with national development objectives.
Reflecting
these divergent views, the draft Ministerial Declaration issued on 26
September 2001 contains two options for a decision to be taken in Doha
on the nature of the future work on investment in the WTO:
-
“We
agree to negotiations which shall aim to establish a multilateral
framework of rules to secure transparent, stable and predictable
conditions for long-term cross-border investment, particularly
foreign direct investment. The framework shall reflect in a
balanced manner the interests of home and host countries, and take
due account of governments’ regulatory responsibilities and
economic development objectives. It shall include as core elements
provisions on scope and definition, transparency,
non-discrimination, pre-establishment commitments based on a
GATS-type approach, and the settlement of disputes between
governments. The special development, trade and financial needs of
developing and least-developed country participants shall be taken
into account as an integral part of the framework, which shall
enable members to undertake obligations commensurate with their
individual needs and circumstances. The negotiations shall pay due
regard to other relevant WTO provisions and to existing bilateral
and regional arrangements on investment. We commit ourselves to
ensure that appropriate arrangements are made for the provision of
technical assistance and support for capacity building both during
the negotiations and as an element of the agreement to be
negotiated.”
or
|
|