· TRIPS - IP
· GATS - trade in services
· TRIMS - investment measures
· Together these would ban most of the measures East Asia used for its growth
· Essentially a tidal wave of meta-regulation: preventing effective regulation.
· Reduce development space (options) and self-determination space

TRIPS
· In force 1994
· Obliges WTO members to enforce IP rights to minimum standards
· Limits state's ability to deny patents
· Sets duration to 20 years
· Limits on ability to insist on compulsory licensing etc
· Because South is patent importer, it bears costs
· Idea that aids innovation spurious; raises costs of journals etc
· Leads to more private, economically motivated research, less likely to benefit poor
· Requirements of patent users greater than of patent holders, meaning South disadvantaged.
        ? Refuse to give a patent and you get taken to WTO dispute system.
        ? Refuse to fulfil obligations to ensure LEDCs get technology, no recourse
· Used as minimum to push for "TRIPS plus" in bilateral negs.
· Doha supposed to fix it but only allowed medicine exceptions. Industrial protection / innovation not tackled.
· Japan, US, Taiwan all chronic copiers in 19th Century
· Brazil: policy says if patented thing not made locally in thre years can be licensed by govt. US takes to WTO. Dropped, but Brazil says will only use for medicines.

TRIMS
· Goes beyond "avoid discrimination" to "avoid distortion," ie preventing performance requirements
· In practise no evidence seems to be required for EU and US to win complaints - say inherently distorting
· Plus might threaten to cut aid or whatever
· Attempted expansion to ban all performance requirements fail BUT it's not clear and LEDCs scared off using them
· TRIMS definition of special treatment narrower than standard - only allows extra time for setting up

GATS
· Extends product trade rules to services
· Includes investment - services FDI is over 50% FDI
· Essentially prevents regulation of foreign services providers
· Never before have governments been prevented from running own services
· [AGAIN eliding neocon and globalisation. By preventing regultion does it prevent govt providing service or simply govt preventing competition?]
· You CAN make requirements of using local firms etc if you make same requirement of local firms
· You can't actually limit their activity.
· There is a broader exemption system but you have to do it at the start
· No evidence yet of any attendant increase in FDI

· This contrasts to pre-Uruguay Round ethos that had much more sense of need for special treatment.
· Violators can be shut out of Northern markets.
· All three agreements vague when suits MEDCs and precise when suits MEDCs
· FDI to LEDCs shrinking as share of world, and still to top LEDCs only.

· Multi Fiber Agreement Allowed MEDCs to put quotas on textile imports. Now abolished but subsidies remain
· CHECK Why haven't LEDCs challenged agri subsidies in the WTO?
· Bilateral agreements use horrible private sector adjudications.
· Ironically economics has over last 20 years become more accepting of irrationalities of market, oligopolistic picing etc. but not filtered through to policy
· Protection and import replacement needs to be done better, not abandoned
· Doesn't need to be - shouldn't be - anti-trade - aims at developing eventual export capacity and industry - THIS the element lacking in Latin America in 70s
· Other argument is that LEDCs lack capacity to run import substitution well - but expected to run copyright regimes etc
· Internal integration = "articulation"
· IE if manufacture is sold to domestic workers, there's more interest in keeping wages high
· Both internal and external can undermine each other
· Actual nuts and bolts of infrastructure etc has fallen away from development discourse
· Embrace comparative advantage (market defining skills and leading specialisation) alongside import replacement. CHECK EH?
· Liberalisation DOES have political value in breaking down oligarchy and starving despots
· TRIPS: should have right to license if not locally produced
· Subsidies etc should be allowed but conditional on improved performance in protected industries
· Need to allow capital controls. We can't safely measure the governance needed to safely liberalise -East Asia.
· Debt relief system needed. Cost of borrowing should be lower when ability to pay is lower (!)
· Idea is to allow different capitalisms and focus on stability. Bretton Woods praised.
· Regional bodies allow less power to distant global, eg Asian Monetary Fund

Chances of change
· US Financial services basically forced GATS through
· TRIPS all Hollywood, software and pharma (CHECK not biotech/agri?)
· LEDC govts too focussed on access to North and not enough on protecting selves
· WTO must be opened up to scrutiny - Bretton Woods project-a-like needed
· WTO staff 80% MEDC