Delegation Report: Young Diplomats of Canada Delegation to the World Trade Organization Public Forum 2019
Executive Summary
Canada emerges as a leader among nation-states as the World Trade Organization (WTO) faces increased scrutiny over its dispute settlement mechanism crisis. WTO members have been unable to negotiate updates to the organization’s governing rules. As a result, the Appellate Body is increasingly producing decisions on ambiguous or incomplete WTO rules and thus provoking charges by member-states that the rulings infringe on their national sovereignty. For the past few years, US officials have blocked appointments of Appellate Body members in order to force WTO members to negotiate new rules that address US concerns and limit the scope for judicial overreach. In this tense environment, our delegates approached the contentious discussion of trade with an understanding that we must continue to advocate for the progress of notable systemic movements that challenge the flawed foundations of trade institutions. The week we spent in Geneva was an opportunity to both learn and convey our thoughts to ambassadors and representatives on how the Canadian approach to trade negotiations can be strengthened to advocate for those who have been largely ignored by neoliberal trading systems. Prior to arriving at the forum, we were told multiple times that ‘social issues’ were not a major concern at the WTO. However, our bilaterals disproved this assertion as ambassadors and WTO representatives welcomed critical questions about how their work was actively acknowledging and working to remedy the lasting intersectional impacts of trade on marginalized communities. WTO Gender Focal Point Anoush der Boghossian even drew an example from the tiles displayed behind the reception counter of the WTO building. The tiles listed labor organization rights, including the social and economic responsibilities of international institutions, enshrined into the 1919 Versailles Treaty. Up until five years ago, they were covered with a black plaque with the WTO logo on it, as the tiles represented principles that many member-states were not yet ready to accept. Today, the logo plaque is removed and these tiles are exposed, symbolizing the very beginnings of a changing nature in trade. Our delegation hoped to continue asking critical questions, and centre the lived experiences of those whose lives are directly impacted by international trade.
Mission Statement
“"The WTO is in a unique place to push for a more sustainable, inclusive, and human-rights centered approach to trade."
Global trade is dominated by the economic interests of large transnational corporations that hold disproportionate sway over trade negotiations between nation-states. Powerful players are emboldened to craft international trade agreements that directly benefit their economic interests, thus raising ethical questions on the conflicting legacies of international trade institutions. Concerns of marginalized communities including Indigenous peoples, small businesses, workers, women and minorities, are historically silenced in favor of building systems of trade liberalisation. Canada’s trade agenda prioritizes sustainability, gender equality, labour rights and the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises.
This year, the Young Diplomats of Canada delegation to the WTO Public Forum strive to uphold these standards by centering and advocating on behalf of marginalized communities and stakeholders. The WTO is in a unique place to push for a more sustainable, inclusive, and human-rights centered approach to trade. By working together with representatives of nation-states and organizations from around the world our delegation will emphasize the need for an increased presence of marginalized voices in mainstream global trade discourse.
Key Sessions
Trade as a driver of Gender Empowerment
This year’s WTO Public Forum had an unprecedented number of sessions dedicated to addressing the intersection between gender and trade. Panelists on each session spoke not only of the domestic-level change that needed to be implemented through policy but also the larger systemic upheavals necessary to advance women’s economic liberation. Mothers and women do not benefit from neoliberal trading frameworks. Current trading systems are built on the deliberate silencing of female labor, both paid and unpaid, and the fostering of low-skilled and temporary service labor as the sole option for women in domestic economies. It was important to remind ourselves that a gendered analysis of trade does not exist in a vacuum, but rather contributes to the deconstruction of neoliberal trade frameworks, institutions and policy that lead to increased inequality. Every session sought to understand how the three pillars of the forum; services, the next generation, and the next chapter of WTO, uniquely address gendered perspectives. One session attempted to answer a question that tied together trade in services, gender disparity, and environmental sustainability: “How does trade in public services impact gender equality and sustainable development?” One panelist conveyed that the service trade disproportionately exploits the female workforce dependent on low-skilled labor because adequate resources, provisions (like appropriate transportation, childcare, etc.), and working conditions do not exist for certain women to invest in opportunities beyond service jobs. New trade futures must hold corporations accountable for the future that they choose to invest in – one that must include women-centered labor, anti-pollution efforts, and active efforts to abolish precarious work.
A lot, but not all, of this work can be accomplished if we systematically re-assess macroeconomic policy to incorporate a feminist lens and using a bottom-up approach to provide the tools and skills necessary to succeed. These themes were re-visited in our bilateral meeting with Anoush der Boghossian, an Economic Affairs Officer with the WTO Trade and Gender Focal Point Unit. She brought up the need to re-think how women entrepreneurs use e-commerce as a tool to market themselves and learn about trade regulations. Through her nuanced analysis and personal stories of female entrepreneurs she met through her field work, we understood that digital literacy campaigns directed at female business owners should not be limited to capacity building (i.e. product assembly, packaging, etc.) but should seek to inform these women of international trade legislation and customs rules that impact their work. By doing so, she emphasized that the future of equitable trade policy will rest in how we listen to women at the local level and hold governments, corporations and institutions accountable. At the end of our conversation, Ms. Der Boghossian mentioned a theory on changing cultures of organizations that she was referencing in a recent report. She drew a pyramid with three tiers, with the top tier indicating a 1 to 2 year gap for policy change to occur; the middle tier showing a 3 to 5 year gap for value systems to shift; and for the last tier a 20 year+ gap for culture to change. Achieving systemic change would be a long-term process and it takes action from all levels to centre lived experiences and re-structure an institution that has, for far too long, benefitted from women’s labour.
Trade as a driver of climate change action
Our bilateral meeting with Karsten Steinfatt, Trade and Environment Division of the WTO Secretariat, was a key engagement on this theme.
The meeting with Mr. Steinfatt was structured differently from the previous bilateral engagements we had been involved in. He came prepared with a power point deck that brought our attention to the research and the projects that the WTO had been working on in the area of trade and the environment.
One project was an initiative to track the environmental provisions included in each trade deal. Notably, the newly-negotiated Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement had a high number of these provisions. We were curious about what this might mean for future engagement of Indigenous peoples around the world. One of our delegates suggested that the onus would be on Canada to maintain with the precedent they have set with CUSMA in having indigenous peoples involved. For example, Canada the United Kingdom may negotiate a bilateral trade deal in the wake of Brexit. We are curious to see how much input the federal government would seek from Indigenous peoples on that file.
Mr. Steinfatt also mentioned a project to examine the effects of eliminating tariffs on green tech. Interestingly, the meeting suggested that 63% of countries would use more energy efficient lighting if tariff barriers didn’t exist. Another project considered the life cycle of goods and followed the carbon outputs generated to create them. Mr. Steinfatt showed us how there is research to suggest that for some goods it is much less carbon intensive to import from far away – for example, in the case of Valentine’s Day roses. He used the example of living in London and importing by ship from the Netherlands, as opposed to importing by plane from Kenya. We were all under the assumption that the Dutch Roses would be less carbon intensive when we factor in the fertilization, the energy required for a greenhouse, and things like water usage – all considered the Kenyan roses with their air travel paled in comparison to the carbon emitted in the process of producing those flowers in the Netherlands. He argued that this is an example of how trade can actually be beneficial to the reduction of carbon – when we have specialization within different locales that produce goods at a much lower carbon cost, just like many proponents of free trade say that certain countries can produce goods at a lower cost.
Although it is important for the WTO to consider ways to reduce the carbon footprint of luxury goods, we were also wondering whether it was truly necessary to consume so many luxury goods in the first place. Ultimately, the meeting was extremely informative but served as a reminder that we have a long way to go to reinforce the idea to major policy makers that the environment is a youth priority – and it needs to be theirs too, before it’s too late.
Trade as an instrument for international development
Trade has often been presented as a key concept and instrument to economic development and economic prosperity. One role of the WTO is to provide countries with a platform to negotiate the rules of trade amongst themselves with the goal of helping producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers to conduct their business. However, on its website, the WTO also states its focus on making the organization more beneficial for less developed countries. Knowing the WTO’s focus on facilitating trade between countries and making it more accessible for developing nations to participate in international trade, we were curious to learn how the WTO has been beneficial for developing countries.
The WTO need to understand the changes we are noticing in those countries, as they are changing the way trade operates. The advancement of their populations and their growing economy led to the emergence of a booming and thriving middle-class in Africa and Asia (e.g. Nigeria, India, China), attracting global attention for opportunities to do business in those regions to meet the demand of their growing population and a newly expanded middle-class.
In one example, Africa is on the rise to become a powerhouse in global trade. Most recently, 54 African countries negotiated the African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA), which could unite 1.3 billion people, create a $3.4 trillion economic bloc and bolster trade within the continent. Having one of the focus of the public forum being the emergence of new trading markets such as Africa, we were curious to investigate how one of the fastest growing regions in the world could align with Canada’s priorities.
As YDC delegates, we came to the Public Forum open-minded and ready to learn more about the role of the WTO in international trade. As it turned out, we spent a significant part of our time learning about the organization’s limitations and flaws. Even though trade can be used as an instrument to economic prosperity, the WTO also needs to take additional steps to fully integrate social issues, such as the environment and gender, into trade discussions and negotiations.
In some areas, there is a strong resistance from the WTO members to talk about social issues. During our bilateral meeting with Ms. der Boghossian, she mentioned that developing countries raise the importance of including social issues in these discussions, as they believe that the resistance from developed countries is a way to prevent them from market access and is harmful to them as they are the ones being the most affected.
We was also eager to learn more about how the ACFTA could boost Africa’s overall economy and stimulate trade within the continent and among other nations. During panel discussions and bilateral meetings, many had stated that African countries, mostly exporting raw material to other regions, should enhance their value chain. During the opening of the forum, Mr. Adebola Williams, a Nigerian entrepreneur, stated that the African continent need to change the way it exports and should start adding value to its products. For example, producers of cocoa end up exporting it and re-import it as Swiss chocolate. In Mr. Williams’ view, product transformation and improving the value chain is what is needed for Africa to prosper in trade.
During the forum, delegate Saïka Sazarin also met with Mr. Komi Tsowou, an Economist for the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. He provided a unique perspective to why the African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA) could be beneficial in the long run. THE ACFTA could be a way to reduce tariff barriers, but also non-tariff barriers in the long-term. The ACFTA addresses directly the technical and structural barriers that have so far fragmented trade and investment relations between African economies. The agreement will contribute to promoting intra-African trade, an imperative to provide a push for the development of industrial capacities and encourage the emergence of regional value chains to create jobs and ensure prosperity. Although recent studies show that value-added manufacture as a share of intra-Africa trade has increased and led mainly by transport equipment, food and beverages, and textiles and apparel, the capacity of these sectors to generate employment and structural change remains underdeveloped. To Komi’s belief, there could be many ways the Canadian Government could get involved to help address these issues.
Delegate Reflections
Anna Desmarais
Climate change is one of the defining issues of our generation, but the fight for climate action has not been entirely in the national spotlight until the first report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was released last year. In that report, the IPCC warned the world that “aggressive political action” was needed in order to limit global temperatures to 1.5 degrees by 2030. If politicians the world over did not heed their call, the IPCC continued, there would be devastating effects including an increased frequency of climate-related natural disasters, climate-related deaths and refugees fleeing barren countries.
When I was asked to think about how we could modernize the WTO before 2030, the need for clear climate action was the first thing that came to mind. Part of my decision to study the WTO’s climate action plan at this year’s Public Forum is because millions of Canadians and youth around the world are taking to the streets, pleading their governments for clear climate action. The WTO, like other international organizations, has a fundamental role to play to encourage not only independent climate protectionism from member-states but also to facilitate international cooperation on how to maintain global temperatures.
It was encouraging to see this conversation take center stage in Geneva. It comes at an important time for the WTO, which is facing increased scrutiny from U.S President Donald Trump and the international community writ-large for its lack of assistance to regulate our uncertain global trading system. Naturally, stakeholders at the table were quick to include aggressive climate action as one of the priorities they wanted to see from the WTO.
The WTO says sustainable trade and environmental protections are “fundamental” to its mandate and that it allows member-states adopt their own trade-related measures to protect the environment and reduce carbon emissions. However, what we heard on the ground paints a different story. “It’s proving very difficult to get to climate solutions at the WTO,” Karsten Steinfatt, a trade and environment counsellor for the WTO, told our delegation during a bilateral meeting. “There are so many other issues at play, like livelihoods, trade interests and export interests. Any environmental negotiation becomes extremely complex.”
One of Mr. Steinfatt’s challenges could be an indecisive conversation on the scope of the WTO’s mandate to address “progressive” files like climate change. Jonathan Fried, Canada’s Ambassador to the WTO, told the delegation that he believes the majority of the problem-solving on climate change should be done by other international organizations, such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) that has a clear mandate. Crispin Conroy from the International Chamber of Commerce agreed, but called for more cooperation between UN bodies and the WTO. “It is a question to us to reinforce the value of organizations outside of the WTO that can play a more constructive role within the organization, not just one week during the year,” Conroy told a panel on decarbonizing global trade.
Our delegation also heard several possible climate-friendly policies that the WTO could enforce, including harmonizing national carbon prices, labelling products made with non-renewable energy sources as well as giving incentives to national governments that end fossil fuel subsidies. We were also encouraged to think about how the WTO could encourage developed countries, like Canada, to assist less developed countries in the climate action fight.
Angela Francis, Chief Economist at the World Wide Fund for Nature, summed it up the best. “We need to act in the next six months,” Francis told a rapt audience at an overflowing 8:30 am session on decarbonizing trade, “Whatever systems we choose, we need to put things in place so companies can start investing … in systems that will preferentiate decarbonization.”
Saïka Sazarin
I applied to the Young Diplomats of Canada’s program to learn about the WTO but also to challenge my understanding of international trade. Coming from a business background, I always viewed trade as an instrument to economic development and prosperity without thinking further on how rules-based trading systems could be detrimental to some. The WTO mandate was always clear to me, which was to enable countries with a platform to negotiate the rules of trade amongst themselves with the goal of helping producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers to conduct their business. However, the WTO also states its focus on making the organization more beneficial for less developed countries.
For the forum, I tasked myself to learn more about the dynamics of developing countries in the World Trade Organization, especially in the case of African countries. “Trading Forward – Adapting to a changing world” was the topic of this year’s public forum. The WTO Director General, Mr. Roberto Azevêdo, kicked off the public forum by stressing the need for all participants of global trade, such as the WTO, to recognize and adapt to a trading environment that is rapidly evolving. In the case of developed countries, the advancement of their populations and their growing economy led to the emergence of a booming and thriving middle-class in Africa and Asia (e.g. Nigeria, India, China), attracting global attention for opportunities to do business in those regions to meet the demand of their growing population and a newly expanded middle-class. The WTO need to understand the changes we are noticing in those countries, as they are shifting the dynamics of trade.
Youth involvement and participation was an important focus for this year’s panels, as the WTO was really interested to learn about what Millennials and Generation Z expects from global trade. Interestingly, intersectionality between trade and social issues were widely addressed in the many panels and bilateral meetings we attended. As I mentioned previously, trade can be used as a tool to economic development, however it is instrumental for us to consider social aspects, as it can affect negatively marginalized groups. However, my colleagues and I were reminded at many occasions that social issues such as the environment, gender and human rights, did not fall under the WTO’s mandate. According to a bilateral meeting with Ms. Anoush der Boghossian, Economic Affairs Officer to the WTO Trade and Gender Focal Point, developing countries were the ones that raised the importance of including social issues in the WTO’s discussions as they are the ones the most affected. In their view, the resistance from developed countries is a way to prevent them from market access. To keep its relevance in today’s trade environment, many panels speakers called for the WTO to reform. Jeffrey Sachs, Professor at the University of Colombia, summed it up best: “Rules-based trading system has been key for prosperity but now trade rules also need to adapt to contribute to social and environmental goals.”
Mark Garcia
My experience at the WTO public forum was one of mixed realizations. When I sought this experience, I was hopeful that I would be able to make a positive difference and bring a voice to marginalized peoples. While I tried my best to bring the voices of working-class or Indigenous peoples to the WTO Public Forum in both bilateral meetings and conversations with fellow delegates, I couldn’t help but feel the unwelcome familiarity of token consultation.
Having been an advocate for marginalized groups for many years, and most recently beginning work at the Assembly of First Nations, I have started to recognize the difference between consultation and co-operation. At the WTO Public Forum, the theme, “Trading Forward – Adapting to a Changing World”, gave me hope that transformative ideas would be discussed on issues that really mattered to youth. There was even a marked focused on incorporating youth into the international trade arena, with breakout sessions and workshops specifically focused on youth perspectives. I understood why the Public Forum was trying to incorporate a youth voice – it didn’t need to be explicitly said (even though it was a number of times). But the WTO itself as an organization is facing a crisis. Between the growth of populist-fuelled isolationism and the trend towards bi-lateral or regional agreements, multilateralism is being threatened.
With all of this in mind, I was really expecting the youth voice to be amplified. In reality, I couldn’t help but feel that the difference between consultation and co-operation was fully on display once again. The lack of youth in staff or leadership positions was disheartening. Even in areas where the panels were geared towards youth, often the chairs of these discussions weren’t youth themselves and the rooms were empty outside of those under 30. The WTO must incorporate staff from marginalized groups so that lived experiences can shape their priorities.
A number of representatives of the WTO were open to discussing the intersectional short-comings of the organization. Nevertheless, I felt that my privilege did not do justice to speaking to these issues. If we really want to have buy-in from everyone, and not just elites there must be more people from working-class or marginalized communities participating and leading in this system. I encouraged the idea of having the WTO fund costs for marginalized peoples to travel and attend this forum (at one of the most expensive and inaccessible cities in the world) and even my fellow youth delegates from other countries wouldn’t get behind this. Granted, there were recommendations for a transition to more accessible spaces through the use of technology, so I’m hopeful we’ve opened the space up for more marginalized voices to be consulted when it comes to policy decisions on international trade. Whether our input will be reflected in the WTO’s work remains to be seen, however I am cautiously skeptical.
I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to observe the state of global trade for marginalized groups. Outside of a strong prioritization on gender equity, which I wholeheartedly commend the WTO for working towards, I was left feeling disappointed while also emboldened. I couldn’t help but feel that the entire youth-centred focus by the WTO was more consultation for the sake of being able to claim having done so than actually implementing the recommendations, priorities, and goals of the groups being engaged. Canada and the WTO have both used the notion of consultation to claim consent. In reality, consent should be driven towards decision making that is free, prior and informed. So about that theme: “Adapting to a Changing World”? We must adapt, but we must ensure it is not at the cost of continuing to leave marginalized peoples behind. Change will be driven by young Canadian activists pushing Canada to be better. We can and we will.
Antoine Tremblay
When applying to the Young Diplomats of Canada’s delegation to the World Trade Organization Public Forum, I was coming in, I realize now, with quite a lot of assumptions about how it functioned - poorly; who it served - a small elite; and how it affected everyone else - adversely. This, I thought, was because the mandate of the WTO was too narrowly focused on economic issues, when it should have also dealt with development in general. However, though it did hold these misguided preconceived notions, I must candidly admit that I did not actually know much about the inner workings of the WTO. Fortunately, this experience was a privilege to learn more about the WTO’s true functioning and objectives. It led me to better appreciate what the WTO does well and what it can improve.
I went into the WTO Public Forum with two priorities in mind: sustainability and equity. Both deal with fairness, either towards the planet or towards others, and both were in my mind inextricable. Furthermore, sustainability and equity to me still felt seldom discussed in policy circles and halls of power: these concerns were that of my generation, protesting by the hundreds of thousands in the streets of Montreal just a week prior to my departure and demanding action climate action; they were also the concerns of my other home country, Morocco, who, like many other developing countries, struggled to reduce socio-economic inequality and provide opportunity for all in the world’s harsh neoliberal order. These challenges, a looming climate crisis and ever-widening injustices, were, to me, impossible to ignore for the WTO. Indeed, globalized trade both is responsible for some of these hardships and can be a solution to them as well.
This year’s theme was “Trading Forward: Adapting to a Changing World”. As such, this edition of the Public Forum was ideal to push my concerns and those of young people. I got to meet people from the Trade & Environment Office, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa and others.
Though the work and attention put into ecological issues and some social issues like gender equality are growing, I was initially somewhat dismayed at the all-too piecemeal approach to addressing trade’s impact on a wide array of fields. Some pioneered more holistic, innovative, including Karsten Steinfatt, from the Trade & Environment Office, who laid out before us his extraction-to-consumption model for assessing the ecological impact of goods. This, and much else, opened my eyes to the need to push for greater wholesale integration of comprehensive, holistic approaches to studying sustainability and equity. Only by mainstreaming these analyses can we better the impact of trade for all.
In short, I thoroughly enjoyed my YDC experience at the WTO. It plentifully enriched my view and understanding of the international trade system. Though there’s much more to be done, the dutiful, impassioned lobbying of my colleagues and I for fairness, combined with the receptiveness of at least some in the WTO, gives me hope that we can achieve the global trade system we want and need.
Abarna Selvarajah
Prior to researching for the application to attend the WTO Public Forum, I had never truly considered the intersections of trade as an appropriate way to pursue justice, accountability, and reform. Stakeholders that often find themselves ignored in global trade discourse include women, people of color, and other oppressed, racialized minorities. Their experience navigating trade negotiations, building stronger international networks, and participating within labor systems engage a diverse set of lived experiences that are often neglected in the larger scheme of bilateral and multilateral agreements. I was particularly concerned with the plight of Tamil women in Sri Lanka, who, following the end of the Sri Lankan civil war, were expected to rebuild entire communities destroyed by violence while also providing for their families and pursuing justice for their missing and passed loved ones. In some cases, widows and survivors of the war found jobs with NGOs clearing minefields that were populated with landmines. Women were displaced from their homes due to government shelling and offered little help on behalf of the government to provide for their families and partners that were often injured in the war.
Trade ministers and representatives are recognizing that trade discourse cannot continue to be treated in isolation from its gender-related human rights narratives. Urgent work must be done to address the historical and ongoing suppression of women in trade in order to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), notably SDG 5: achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls by 2030. I’ve always been hesitant to approach broad and buzz-word policy discussions, since it seems like policymakers set timelines and quotas that are unrealistic in international institutions and prioritize the sovereignty of member-states above global regulations. However, after having attended the WTO Public Forum, I saw that some incredible representatives (predominantly women) were doing both the ground and policy work needed to deliver trade information to female entrepreneurs and ensure accessible economic access for women entering the workforce.
One organization that I was fortunate to meet with multiple times over the week was SheTrades, a sub-group of the International Trade Center, an organization dedicated to offering resources and tools to women-owned businesses. Aligned with their work, panels included notable female speakers who critiqued trade policies at all levels, from exposing domestic service regulation as it curated ‘regulatory colonialistic practices,’ to arguing that entrepreneurship was not a line of work that many females in developing countries choose to enter, but rather were forced to pursue due to circumstances out of their control. Many representatives also spoke about the resistance posed against them when they tried to integrate an intersectional gendered lens of trade; but this served to only motivate their cause and advocate for those whose voices were often neglected during trade negotiations.
How do we use technology and policy to rebuild an incredibly flawed organization into one that holds corporations and nation-states accountable for the economic, social, political, and cultural barriers that women face as they step into all levels of trade? While no one answer is sufficient, I truly believe that if we continue to acknowledge and actively re-structure neo-colonial power balances in trade, this change can be possible.
Conclusion
Recently, Canada’s trade policies have pushed for gender inclusion, environmental sustainability, and capacity building efforts to be at the forefront of bilateral and multilateral deals. Our delegation took this momentum and tried to push its limits, by grounding our lessons, discussions and advocacy in an understanding of the trade system’s historical neglect of low-wage workers, women, children, and various marginalized communities. In this report, delegates reflected on WTO Public Forum sessions that discussed international trade disputes, domestic service regulation, trade and women’s rights, trade and climate change action, among many others. They also discussed how their professional and personal backgrounds contributed to a more rich and thoughtful discourse with representatives, who encouraged us to continue pursuing opportunities within the Public Service as an avenue to institutionalize meaningful change. We are grateful for having the opportunity to represent the Young Diplomas of Canada and look forward to the work we will continue to do in advancing systemic change at all levels of government. Thank you!