Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:36:53.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The institutionalization of a parliamentary dimension of an intergovernmental organization: the WTO

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2011

HILMAR ROMMETVEDT
HILMAR ROMMETVEDT*
Affiliation:
IRIS – International Research Institute of Stavanger
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article analyses the development of a parliamentary dimension of the WTO from the first informal meetings of parliamentarians in 1996, via the adoption of Rules of Procedure for yearly Parliamentary Conferences on the WTO in 2004, to March 2011 when for the first time the Parliamentary Conference took place on the premises of the WTO. The author presents theoretical contributions that may explain why national parliamentarians engage in an intergovernmental organization such as the WTO. The development of the parliamentary dimension is related to the crumbling borderline between domestic and international affairs. Finally, the article raises a number of questions for further research, and for consideration among parliamentarians as well as in the WTO.

Type
Review Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , October 2011 , pp. 423 - 446
Copyright
Copyright © Hilmar Rommetvedt 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beer, S. H. (1990 [1966]), ‘The British Legislature and the Problem of Mobilizing Consent’, in Norton, P. (ed.), Legislatures, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berg, P. and Schmitz, G. J. (2006), Strengthening Parliamentary Oversight of International Trade Policies and Negotiations: Recent Developments in Canada and Internationally, Parliamentary Information and Research Service, Library of Parliament, http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0568-e.pdf.Google Scholar
Chutikul, K. (2003), ‘Options for a Parliamentary Dimension of the WTO’, Discussion paper presented to the Parliamentary Conference on the WTO, Geneva, 17–18 February 2003, http://www.ipu.org/splz-e/trade03/2c.pdf.Google Scholar
CPA Study Group (2002), Report of a CPA Study Group on Parliament and the International Trading System, Saint Lucia: Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, www.agora-parl.org/node/291.Google Scholar
Crum, B., and Fossum, J. E. (2009), ‘The Multilevel Parliamentary Field: A Framework for Theorizing Representative Democracy in the EU’, European Political Science Review, 1(2): 249–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damgaard, E. (1994), ‘The Strong Parliaments of Scandinavia’, in Copeland, G. W. and Patterson, S. C. (eds.), Parliaments in the Modern World, Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Damgaard, E. (2003), Folkets styre: Magt og ansvar i dansk politik, Århus: Aarhus Universitetsfolag.Google Scholar
Frankel, J. (1970), National Interest, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. (1998), ‘International Institutions and Domestic Politics: GATT, WTO, and the Liberalization of International Trade’, in Krueger, A. O. (ed.), The WTO as an International Organization, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hveem, H. (1998), ‘Globalisering – retorikk og realiteter’, Samtiden, 5(6): 36–46.Google Scholar
Langhelle, O. and Rommetvedt, H. (2004), ‘The Role of Parliament in International Relations and WTO Negotiations: The Case of Norway’, World Trade Review, 3(2): 189–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mezey, M. (1979), Classifying Legislatures, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Milner, H. V. (1997), Interests, Institutions and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nogales, X. E. de (2006), The WTO in 2016: Two Scenarios, Geneva: CASIN.Google Scholar
Norton, P. (ed.) (1990), Legislatures, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Olsen, J. P. (1983), Organised Democracy: Political Institutions in a Welfare State – the Case of Norway, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Packenham, R. A. (1990 [1970]), ‘Legislatures and Political Development’, in Norton, P. (ed.), Legislatures, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pedersen, O. K. (2002), EU i forvaltningen, København: Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag.Google Scholar
Polsby, N. W. (1975), ‘Legislatures’, in Greenstein, F. I. and Polsby, N. W. (eds.), Handbook of Political Science, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Puig, L. M. de (2008), International Parliaments, Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. D. (1988), ‘Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games’, International Organization, 42(3): 429–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rommetvedt, H. (2003), The Rise of the Norwegian Parliament, London/Portland, OR: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
Rommetvedt, H., Zajc, D., and Langhelle, O. (2009), ‘The Internationalization of National Parliaments: The Norwegian Storting and the Slovene Državni zbor’, Politics in Central Europe, 5(1): 55–85.Google Scholar
Schelling, T. C. (1973), The Strategy of Conflict, London/Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sutherland, P. et al. (2004), The Future of the WTO: Adressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millennium, Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General Supachai Panitcpakdi, Geneva: World Trade Organization, http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/10anniv_e/future_wto_e.pdf.Google Scholar
Trubowitz, P. (1998), Defining the National Interest: Conflict and Change in American Foreign Policy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
WBI (2001), Governance: A Participatory, Action-Oriented Program, World Bank Institute, http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/205639/fy02_brief.pdf.Google Scholar
Zahrnt, V. (2008), ‘Domestic Constituents and the Formulation of WTO Negotiating Positions: What the Delegates Say’, World Trade Review, 7(2): 393–421.Google Scholar