Campaign on Linkages
| CUTS>CITEE>Campaign on Linkages >Introduction |
| Home About CUTS CITEE CART CHD C-SPAC CUTS-ARC Contact CUTS |
 |
|
|
Campaign on Linkages |
|
Background and Context |
|
CUTS’ Initiative for Capacity Building
on
|
|
The debate on linkage between trade and non-trade issues is not new. For example, mentions on trade and environment, and trade and lalour standards were made in the 1947 text of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Article XX: General Exceptions clause). Since its inception, the GATT Secretariat had been receiving proposals to introduce the principles of maintaining reasonable environmental and labour standards in international trade negotiations. From the very beginning, the issues reflect their contentious nature. The debate got a renewed thrust in late 1980s and early 1990s. Developed and developing countries have polarised positions on the issue of incorporating environmental and labour standards into the WTO platform. The timing, nature and support for linkages between trade and environment, and trade and labour standards reflect that they are going to be major irritants for developing countries to benefit from the multilateral trade regime. However, both the protagonists as well as antagonists of the debate are, more often than not, advocating extreme stands without taking into account the equally important, if not more, linkage between trade and socio-economic development. Not only there is lack of understanding on the part of many civil society groups and trade unions, concerted efforts are not being made to engage in discussions. What is required is dialogue to address the issues in an unbiased manner and try to find solutions to the problems by evolving a roadmap through consensus rather than creating roadblocks. Realising this vacuum and pursuant to its mandate of building consensus on contentious issues hindering economic development of developing countries, CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment has undertaken a programme of analysing and understanding various facets and positions on linkages, be they between trade and labour standards, trade and environment, trade and poverty etc. This programme has the potential of:
What
Needs to be Done?
Output
Enough is Enough: TWIN-SAL Statement Just before the Seattle Ministerial Conference, CUTS had coordinated the ‘Third World Intellectuals and NGOs Statement Against Linkage’ (TWIN-SAL), brainchild of Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati, Arthur Lehman Professor of Economics and Professor of Political Science, Columbia University, New York, USA, and Chairman of the International Advisory Board of the CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment. The same was also circulated far and wide, and over 100 signatures of prominent people around the world were obtained in support of the same. The TWIN-SAL was also carried in a special edition of CUTS-CITEE’s flagship publication: Economiquity, published in November 1999, as a backgrounder for a side event at the Seattle Ministerial Conference. This edition also carried opposing and supporting views of people and organisations across the world, while the cover carried the statement ‘Enough is Enough’. The side-event was a panel discussion between protagonists and antagonists. Prominent among these were Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati and Mr. James Howard of the Brussels-based International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). There was a clear understanding that for implementation of the best standards a sanctions-based approach will be counter-productive. Therefore the house felt that there is an urgent need to continue the dialogue between the two sides. Secondly, there is very poor understanding of the socio-economic situation in the South and there is a strong need to build capacities in the North to be able to understand and appreciate them. Introduction
The project has been launched in January 2000 with the initiation of research activities and negotiations with dialogue partners, sponsors, and donor agencies. Large number of agencies have shown interest in joining in the project as supporters, in different ways. Stakeholders
Objective
Goals
The Core Questions of this Campaign
The Three-pronged Approaches: Research, Networking, and Advocacy The project will be implemented through conducting research, which could include simple literature surveys. This research will be guided by an international advisory committee of economists, social and political scientists. The second leg of the project will involve networking with a wide range of research institutions, NGO, media, inter-government and government organisations. The last leg of the project will outline advocacy measures to be adopted to get the results across to people. It will include outreach and publication activities.
Under the project, research would be conducted on two broad areas viz. Trade and Labour Standards, and Trade and Environment. Trade
and Labour Standards
Child
labour in South Asia
Voluntary
instruments on implementation of fair labour standards in the South with
special focus on South Asia
The study would be conducted in collaboration with National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER), New Delhi, India, and it would be completed by October 2001. Clarifying
the concepts on labour standards and trade
The study would be conducted in collaboration with National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER), New Delhi, India, and it would be completed by September 2001. Trade
and Environment
Domestically
prohibited goods, trade in toxic waste and technology transfer: Issues
and development
The draft study has been completed, and is under circulation for comments. Comparative
analysis of eco-labeling schemes in three developed and developing countries
Relationship
between MEAs and trade rules: Implications for development
The study would be completed by January 2002. Tariff
escalation and tariff peaks: A study of environment and development issues
The study would be completed
by March 2002.
As part of the networking strategy CUTS has invited NGOs and research institutions to join the campaign as dialogue partners, sponsors and participants for the proposed roundtables and seminars. It helped to reach out to various organisations worldwide who work in the area of workers’ rights, environment protection, trade and development. Moreover, networking with local experts and resource persons including negotiators and policy makers was done to raise these issues at the appropriate forums. The following civil society and research organisations have expressed their intent to join in the project. This doesn’t mean that they are either supporting or opposing the positions of the organisers. 1. MS, Denmark
Project
Advisory Committee
1. Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati,
Columbia University, USA
The project envisages organising a series of roundtable discussions and seminars all over the world, in particular in Western cities. Distinction between the two issues of labour standards and environmental standards will be maintained very clearly. Organising Conferences/Meetings The first public event was organised at Seattle in December 1999. Ever since the launching of the project three Panel Discussions have been organised on the sidelines of major global meetings:
This Panel Discussion was organised on the sidelines of the 10th session of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Some 75 participants from civil society and media along with few government delegates to UNCTAD X participated in this highly interactive discussion. The objective of the discussion was to facilitate the process of dialogue between the protagonists and antagonists of the linkages in the WTO. The panelists were Prof. Yash Tandon, Ms. Beatrice Chaytor, Mr. Miloon Kothari, Mr. Pradeep S. Mehta and Mr. G. Rajasekharan. Mr. Tony Hill of the United Nations Non-government Liaison Service (UN-NGLS), Geneva, Switzerland moderated the discussion. The outcome of the meeting was that linking labour or environmental standards within the sanction-based mechanism of the WTO may harm the development prospects of third world countries. Therefore, further dialogues and consensus building are required on this issue. Panel
discussion: Labour Linkage from the Viewpoint of Trade Sanctions, June
29, 2000, Geneva, Switzerland
Panel
discussion: Are Trade Sanctions the Legitimate Instruments for the
This Panel Discussion was organised on the sidelines of the 16th World Congress of the Consumers International (CI) at Durban. The specific objective of the discussion was to gather the views of consumer organisations from both North and South on the issue of application of trade sanctions. It was argued that it was not right on the part of the developed countries to push for linking child labour issues with international trade as the developed countries had themselves experienced several social evils during their long journey to development. Therefore, developing countries need to be given sufficient time to overcome the social evils of child labour rather than imposing trade sanctions. It was agreed that unless we tackle poverty, child labour would continue to stay in developing countries. It was also noted that the causes of poverty are both endogenous and exogenous. Among the latter, terms of trade is a major factor. A prominent floor participant, Ms. Rhoda Karpatkin, head of the US-based Consumers Union came out convinced that poverty has to be tackled to find cures for child labour problem and that either sanctions or boycotts are not the right solutions. The panel lists were Mr. Robin Simpson and Dr. Zafar Mirza, and Mr. Pradeep S. Mehta moderated the discussion. Over 50 consumer activists attended in this interactive meeting. Panel
discussion: The Social Clause and Linkage at the WTO: What is at
Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati of Columbia University, New York, USA was the lead speaker. He stressed that the government of India should take a proactive stance in taking the viewpoints of Indian NGOs in trade negotiations held at the multilateral levels as well as on economic policy issues relating to globalisation and liberalisation. According to Prof. Bhagwati and other panellists, adherence to core labour standards and the linkage between trade and labour standards are two separate issues, and the two should not be clubbed together. On the issue of economic liberalisation and globalisation, majority of the participants expressed that governments at the national as well as sub-national levels should devise proactive policies to create opportunities so that the poor can get out of poverty. But, at the same time, the policies should also take into account measures relating to social safety nets so that the adjustment process is smooth. Other speakers in the panel
were Mr. Vinod Vaish, Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Government of India,
and Prof. Muchkund Dubey, Former Foreign Secretary of India.
Panellists and participants were unanimous in opposing the inclusion of social clauses into the World Trade Organisation, and expressed that overloading the WTO with non-trade issues will do more harms than good to the rule based multilateral trading system. As part of the advocacy work, CUTS representatives have been participating in national and international conferences, where linkage issues are being discussed. The various literature and advocacy material on the project are being distributed to the participants. Moreover, interventions are also being made at other fora, wherever these issues are raised. Conference
on Sustainability in the WTO Millennium Round and Beyond
Mehta presented a paper: “Linkages: What are the Issues, the Problems and Possible Solutions?” The paper outlines the project as detailed in this Dossier as well. The paper caught the attention of the Performance and Innovation Unit of the Cabinet Office of the British Government, who were influenced by it in its own report which too argues that linkages can be counter productive. This paper has also been published by the RIIA in the conference proceedings. Implications
of the WTO and Other Trade Agreements on the Public and
5th
International Business Forum, October 2-6, 2000, Hannover, Germany
The CUTS representative argued in this meeting that if the North is really concerned about the condition of labour in the South, the demand for linkages at the WTO should be rejected, and be placed at the ILO. the moderator of the debate: Dr Konrad von Moltke, and other participants noted that she engaged with the debate very well. Second
Environment Summit, October 11, 2000, New Delhi, India
Consultation
on World Trade and Environment, October 11-13, 2000, Loccum, Germany
Tetarwal addressed a session on “Is trade better than aid”, and said that trade should be given preference but aid is equally important as many of the developing countries even do not have necessary infrastructure for doing trade. He further stressed that a sanction-based approach will never succeed in achieving environmental objectives as only rich countries possessing super commercial powers can afford to impose them. He wondered whether a country like Maldives, which is most likely to be adversely affected by climate change, would ever be able to impose sanctions against the US, the largest producer of greenhouse gases. UNCTAD
World Investment Report Decade Anniversary Panel Discussions October 17,
2000, Geneva, Switzerland
Though Linkage was not a part of the agenda, as the WIRs had never addressed it, Mr Waghorne referred to low labour standards as an incentive for FDI in the rubric of race-to-the-bottom, and thus the need for having a social clause in the WTO and investment agreements. Thus Mehta was required to counter the incessant and ubiquitous propaganda by ICFTU’s representatives to push in the issue of social clauses. He said that standards vary according to the socio-economic conditions and that these cannot be an attraction for FDI to flow. There are 10 factors which determine the FDI flows, and there is no evidence to show that low labour standards are an incentive for FDI to flow. If that be the case then authoritarian countries like Myanmar would be brimming with FDI. His point was supported by two floor interventions, and none against it. Workshop
on Environmental Requirements in World Trade, October 17-20,
Sustainability
in Global Trade, Climate Policy, International Financial
A session was organised in the Trade block with Teteh Horneku of Third World Network, Ghana and Andreas Botsch of the German Trade Union: DGB. Botsch and another nominee from the DGB did not show up. Surprisingly, when two speakers had travelled far from India and Ghana, persons from within Germany could not come in spite of having accepted the invitation. It has been seen quite often that trade union representatives do not stand up to their commitments. Finally, this role was adopted by Ernst Hillebrand of Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, who put up a valiant defence. FES works with trade unions closely being a part of the Socialist Party of Germany. Clearly the audience did not feel that linking trade with social standards can help improve them, and that unless the existing inequities can be addressed properly it is difficult to expect any type of universal approach to any standard. Secondly, no one was ready trust the WTO, which is such an opaque body. World
Bank Seminar on Trade Law, October 24-25, 2000, Washington DC, USA
Clearly the audience was convinced by Mehta about the futility of incorporating worker’s rights in the trade regime. Most of the developing country persons in the audience were quite thrilled with Mehta’s arguments in the debate. Both Levinson and the moderator: Sabine Schlemmer-Schulte of the World Bank conceded that Mehta’s points were very convincing and thus prevailed over any other arguments. National
Conference on Human Rights, Social Movements, and the Law, December 25-31,
2000, Panchgani, India
Pradeep S. Mehta presented a paper ‘Trade and … Where Do We Go?’ The Conference attracted a tremendous diversity in the fifteen hundred activists, legal scholars who participated in the proceedings spanned over seven days. A common thread of thought that ran through many workshops was the profound impact that the current form of globalisation is having on peoples’ struggle for justice and their rights. There was an expressed need for crystalising and enhancing the platforms spanning across issue groups to resist on the retrogressive aspects of globalisation. Economiquity
The
CUTS-CITEE Linkages Update
Articles,
Paper etc
Journals
The Economic Times, India
Social Clause is a Blind
Alley
By Pradeep S. Mehta D. S. Hoskins argues (Letters, May 27) that not racism but the fear of cheap labour coming into the UK is worrying Britons. Rightly so, despite the fact that labour market flexibility demands the lowest costs to maintain competitiveness. The matter demands a closer look from the ICFTU-led trade union brigade and the AFL-CIO bosses, so they can better understand the situation, rather than continuing to bray for a social clause in the WTO agreements which will deny the poor countries their chance of economic development. Leading employment lawyers are advising UK companies to adopt techniques imported from the US for keeping unions out of the workplace before new trade union rights recognition came into force on June 6. The Trade Union Congress rightly criticized the initiative, but it should hit at the root of the problem: attack AFL-CIO for its tardy organization in the US, where only 12 percent of the workers are unionized. Their right to strike is also nullified by the right of employers to hire alternative workers. Notwithstanding its failure to prevent the US Congress approving the China deal, the AFL-CIO needs to consider the problems workers will face in the sunset industries such as textiles and clothing in the US. Quite fairly Stephen Byers, UK trade and industry minister, decided not to intervene over the 60,000 job losses in the UK’s textile industry that resulted from Marks and Spencer buying clothes from overseas. After all, the quota ridden Agreement on Textiles and Clothing requires all wealthy countries to structurally adjust their textile industry so the more competitive developing countries can prosper. And when they prosper, their workers will, not through a social clause. Human Rights at Work are
a Building Block of Stability
By James Howard Pradeep Mehta (‘Social clause is a Blind Alley’, letters, June 3) takes such wild and irrelevant pot-shots at trade unions that most of those attacks do not merit a response. However his unsupported assertion that developing countries and their workers would be losers if there were a way of ensuring respect for basic workers’ rights in the trading system needs rebutting. On the contrary, developing countries who want to protect the fundamental rights of workers and their families in a globalising world economy are precisely the ones that are suffering the most right now, as they face intensifying competition from all countries like China which violate all internationally recognized core labour standards. That form of competition is a one-way race to the bottom. As Bill Jordan, the ICFTU general secretary, has noted, respect for fundamental human rights at work is a building block for long-term stability and sustainability of the world trading system. Mr. Mehta would better be advised to turn his energies to helping achieve that objective, rather than casting aspirations on those who are trying to defend workers’ basic rights worldwide. Ironically, the country he writes from, India – where freedom of association is generally respected – will find it hardest to compete with trading rivals rather less scrupulous in their respect for their own citizens’ human rights at the work place. |
CUTS
Centre For International Trade, Economics
& Environment (CITEE)
D–217, Bhaskar Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur 302 016, India, Ph:
+91(0)141-228 2821 Fax: 91.141.2282485 Email: cuts@cuts.org |
D-217, Bhaskar Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur 302 016, India Ph: 91.141.2282821, Fax: 91.141.2282485
Hosted by: www.fullestop.com |
