Search

International trade in educational services has grown substantially over the past decades. Now it is a billion dollar industry including recruitment of international students, establishment of university campuses abroad, franchised provision and on line education. WTO [World Trade Organization] requires each member nation to make its own schedule of commitments in education services, and to explain its limitations on market access and national treatment as well as other limitations. In the schedules of commitments, commitments are split into two sections: First, "horizontal" commitments which stipulate limitations that apply to all of the sectors included in the schedule; these often refer to a particular mode of supply, notably commercial presence and the presence of natural persons. Any evaluation of sector-specific commitments must therefore take the horizontal entries into account. Second, specific commitments which apply to trade in services in a particular sector or subsector are listed. This paper examines China's commitments in education services under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It provides rough pictures about the impact of China's commitments on its education services.

This paper examines the impact of the World Trade Organization's (WTO) General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) on transnational higher education in four countries: New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia. The GATS is a multilateral agreement through which WTO members commit to voluntary liberalisation of trade in services, including education. Transnational (or offshore) education refers to education that is delivered by an institution based in one country to students located in a different country. Two of the countries considered, New Zealand and Australia, have made commitments under GATS to allow relatively unrestricted cross-border provision of education in their countries, while the other two countries, Singapore and Malaysia, have made no such commitment. There is currently considerable activity in renegotiating countries' commitments to GATS as part of the Doha round of WTO negotiations, and simultaneously bilateral free trade agreements are being proposed between countries in the region. In this context, this paper examines the practical impact that GATS has had on these two countries that have made commitments regarding education, and the likely impact that similar commitments by Malaysia and Singapore would have on the tertiary education systems in those major importing countries. (Contains 1 note.)

The geography of trade in services is becoming increasingly important for a developing country such as Malaysia. But, present discussion on trade in education services, in particular, higher education and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in Malaysia is rather limited and takes a short-term perspective. This is especially so with respect to the analysis of the impact of the GATS negotiations on the Malaysian higher education system. This article discusses Malaysia's current negotiating position insofar as trade in higher education services is concerned. Malaysia's prospects of gaining from trade in higher education services are analyzed. (Contains 3 tables and 1 note.)

International trade in higher education services is one of the fastest growing tradable service sectors globally. Apart from the positive externalities international students create through knowledge mobility and spill-over, campus diversity, and local community development participation, spending by international students in the host city and immediate surroundings add significantly to local economic growth. The aim of this article is to show, firstly, the relative strong growth of South Africa's higher education exports vis-a-vis other countries. We also find that South Africa has a strong comparative advantage in exporting higher education services. Secondly, we use a pilot questionnaire conducted in 2009 at Stellenbosch University to estimate the economic impact of these students on the local economy. We find that international students contribute between R159 million and R172 million per semester to the local economy, in addition to the positive--but largely unquantifiable--externalities they create. (Contains 12 tables.)

The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) of the World Trade Organization has generated an intense and passionate debate about the relationship between free-trade and education and, specifically, about the effects of trade liberalization in national education systems. This article explores in detail this debate from a critical discourse and semiotic approach. Its objective is two-fold. First, it aims at identifying and systematizing the core axes of the debate, as well as at confronting ideas within each of the axes. Second, it aims at explaining how and why the agreement has generated such an intense and polarized discussion in the educational field by, among other analytical strategies, appealing to the broader institutional and ideational contexts in which the debate is inscribed. Arguments are based on observation in public debates on GATS and education and a corpus of 86 texts on the topic coming from different sources including academic journals, conference proceedings, policy reports and newsletters of international and civil society organizations. (Contains 7 notes.)

Higher education is the education level under the most pressure to be internationally liberalized. Currently, the main global instrument to achieve this liberalization goal is the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) of the World Trade Organization. In this paper, the process of trade liberalization of higher education in the GATS framework is examined. The analysis is divided into two main parts. First, the state of the current situation of higher education liberalization and that of other education sectors are reviewed and compared. Second, the factors that influence the undertaking of liberalization commitments on education, specifically higher education, are analyzed. To make these comparative analyses, EduGATS, a novel index to measure the degree of liberalization of educational services, is introduced. (Contains 5 tables, 8 figures and 4 notes.)

Throughout much of the world higher education has been subject to scrutiny, including for example cost, outcomes, stakeholder value, and change. The intensity of the scrutiny and the possible consequences in terms of change have accelerated as a result of 2009 being the year of financial turbulence and scarce resources being used to prop up failing industries such as the automobile industry, compounded by measures such as quantitative easing and huge amounts being made available to the banking sector. This article looks at the different contexts and legal frameworks regarding change being required as a result of legislation rather than happening through some organic way. The article does not focus on the merits of possible change but on how change may be brought about. The European context is that of the Bologna Process (with a brief reminder of the European Union's competency in this area), the US context is that of change at national, regional or state level but with the primary focus being national level change. (Contains 128 notes.)

The nation state is not helpless if it wishes to respond to the significant increase since the 1980s in the cross-border provision of higher education. In 2003, the General Council of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) nevertheless commissioned the development of practices and principles to further regulate cross-border provision of higher education. These were published in late 2005. UNESCO argues that any risks to students and others of "poor quality" cross-border provision of higher education must be addressed. Even if it can be shown, however, that certain risks accompany trade in higher education services, this does not, in and of itself, justify the regulatory response suggested by the Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education, or any other response. This article argues that the guidelines have been defined without any consideration of the potential net benefits, which could be negative, associated with their implementation. Several important implications and limitations of the guidelines are also explored.

Through successive rounds of negotiations, the World Trade Organization (WTO) encourages countries to commit their higher education system to the mandates of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The WTO is an organization committed to the aggressive trade liberalization of services like higher education. This ideology, known as neoliberalism (Apple, 2005) is redefining the role of higher education. Through critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003), three genres of documents have been analyzed in search of the ideology and power relations imbedded in the texts. These genres include informational documents, the legal text of GATS, and proposals from the USA, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan calling for the reduction of trade barriers in higher education. The relationship between the developed countries who are calling for a reduction in trade barriers and developing countries who are struggling to provide public education could be further strained through an international set of trade rules like GATS. Language and text can create, shift, or maintain ideologies. In the case of GATS, the ideology reflects a new imperialism where more powerful countries retain developing countries as markets in which they continue to rule intellectually.

While there have been numerous discussions of the impact on educational services made by trade liberalization through the World Trade Organization (WTO), this study looks at the emergence of global resistance to the commodification of culture through the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) within the WTO. In line with the Council of Europe Declaration on Cultural Diversity in 2000 and the UNESCO Declaration on Cultural Diversity in 2001, a global movement has been fighting for a legally binding global convention on cultural diversity under the auspices of UNESCO. The author examines how "cultural diversity" is defined by various groups and nations. She also discusses the potential implications of such a global convention on cultural diversity for "cognitive justice", that is, for affirming the validity of diverse knowledge systems over against the dominance of neoliberal ideology. Finally, she argues that the leading definition of cultural diversity, contrary to its stated intention, actually serves to re-assert the cultural hegemony of the North rather than benefit subjugated knowledges of the South.

This article focuses on economic analysis of privatisation policies and postprivatisation control devices in India's higher education. As a case study, the experiences of Karnataka State in collegiate education under general higher education are emphasised. A change in public financing, rather than a shift of public ownership and management to private sector, is the most dominant feature of privatisation policies. The impact of privatisation is estimated in terms of fiscal effect, price effect, and effects on quality, equity, and affordability. To overcome the negative effects of privatisation policies, the need for postprivatisation control devices are argued, and a few policy devices are suggested. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development experiences in postprivatisation control devices for manufacturing and infrastructure privatisation are shown to have relevance for both privatisation and globalisation of higher education services, especially in view of bringing education services for negotiations under the World Trade Organisation's General Agreement on Trade in Services. (Contains 5 tables and 23 notes.)

The on going debate about the (World Trade Organisation) General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) framework brings out conflicting views about cross-border education the world over. Between the enthusiastic views of trade promoters, at one end, and the sceptical reflections of academics with a traditional outlook, at the other, there are many different viewpoints. Academics who support the view that education should not be treated as a tradeable commodity argue that cross-border education should always have a revenue generation approach that would be to the disadvantage of developing countries. There are trade enthusiasts who are convinced that the commercialisation of higher education at the global level is unavoidable in the near future and that it is up to the countries to prepare themselves to benefit from the new opportunities of the global market. Sometimes strong criticism of these academics is based on false understandings. It is also true that the views of trade promoters might be equally wrong in some national contexts, based only on optimistic overestimations rather than on grounded realities. This paper explores these false understandings and overestimations that shape the arguments about cross-border education in the Indian context.

This review essay cum discussion paper outlines areas of concern with the underlying terms and conditions of the use of information and communications technology (ICT) in education. The books that instigated this foray ( Barrell, 2001; Cuban, 2001; Maeroff, 2003) are representative of the field and represent inquiry and opinion that reflect uncritical and critical acceptance and implementation of ICT as both a curricular agenda and device. Each book lays tiles in the mosaic of discourse surrounding the inexorable and ubiquitous overlay of ICT in everyday life as germinated in classrooms for a variety of well-intentioned but often misguided and wrong-headed reasons. The hopes, dreams, and drama that form the core issues arise from a deeper "who's steering the boat?" tension. Does ICT serve education, or does education serve ICT? Because education is redefined as a means to social mobility and is connected to status, its commodification challenges the Deweyan notion of "education for the purpose of further education," and transforms it into the pursuit of more adept consumerism only attainable by degree. Promotion and policy development at all levels draw special attention to the increased earning power that further education brings, thus validating its worth. Other writers and thinkers have tweaked this particular aspect of commercialized learning, including Kehl (2004), Kohn (2004), Noble (1998), Nordkvelle and Olson (2005), and Postman (1985, 1993). Combining their perspectives in the context of global movement toward education as a trade in service, a culture of name-branding, competitive accreditation, knowledge ownership, and hegemonic determinism seems inevitable. The likely-to-be postponed signing of General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) (due January 2005; see Kehl, 2004) will temporarily defer the commercialism of higher education, but will not draw much attention nor encourage further debate in the to-ing and fro-ing on the meeting grounds of cross-cultural credentialism and the commodification of teaching and learning unless alarm bells are rung.

This article starts by putting the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) into a general context of privatisation. It is noted that the privatisation process is in many cases complex and not only about full-scale privatisation of schools. The growing trade in education must be seen in this context. GATS is not an agreement which deals with educational issues from a political or educational perspective, but from a commercial and trade perspective. The purpose of GATS is to liberalise trade in services, which also includes education. Commitments made in GATS negotiations are difficult to withdraw and the protection of commercial interests which GATS provides is stronger than the protection of human rights, in, for example, the Convention of the Right of the Child. The protection given in GATS to public services, including public education, is ambiguous at best and in many cases open to interpretation by Trade Dispute Panels. It can be assumed that such panels will deal with some educational matters in future. Another risk for the future is that governments will use GATS as an excuse for deregulation and privatisation within the education sector. There is also a risk that education will become part of a general negotiation game where governments may have to open up the education market in their own countries in order to get access to other markets and that education policies will increasingly be decided by trade ministers instead of education ministers. The international trade union movement, including Education International, has been critical of GATS and has raised a number of issues. Also, there is a growing concern about GATS among national teacher unions. Many teacher unions have taken different initiatives: produced information material; established a dialogue with governments; and built broader coalitions with other trade unions, student organisations, etc. (Contains 3 tables, 1 figure and 1 note.)

Addresses the growing demand for access to higher education and the conditions under which this is leading to a worldwide market through transnational education and the export of educational services. Discusses extension of the General Agreement on Trade in Services to higher education, and the adequacy of Europe's Bologna Process as a response to these global developments. (EV)

Describes Australia's role in promoting educational trade liberalization through the World Trade Organization's (WTO) General Agreement on Trade in Services. The Australian government is pursuing a diversified approach to educational trade promotion, which includes building confidence in international quality assurance mechanisms and demonstrating the benefits of trade-driven internationalization to importing countries. (EV)

Analyzes potential effects of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) on the orientation and control of national education systems. Explains concepts of space, scale, and territorialization in relation to critical shifts in GATS's activity in education. Suggests that rescaling aspects of educational governance to the global level will pose considerable problems for national states, related to diminished state authority and lack of global mechanisms of accountability. (SV)

Analyzes the challenges and opportunities that international trade in educational services represents for higher education systems in industrialized and developing countries and shows the importance of international quality assurance in education. Makes the case that the lifelong learning sector is most likely to be affected by developments related to international trade in educational services. (SLD)

Addresses some of the public policy controversies surrounding the treatment of education services under the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Describes the core features of GATS, highlighting how the four modes of supplying services relate to trade in education services and discusses the limited role GATS may play as a force for change in education. (SLD)

Discusses whether universities need the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) of the World Trade Organization, and concludes that they do not at present. Many questions remain to be answered before GATS should be applied to trade in education services. (SLD)

No longer are talented people with marketable skills restricted to their birth country. According to a recent article in the "Detroit News," U.S. companies are recruiting employees from overseas with strong science skills because they are in short supply. This article discusses the challenges and solutions for successfully exporting community college education globally through distance education.

ryptocurrencies are digital assets created using encryption techniques intended to serve as a means of exchange. Given their cross-border nature, it's important to consider their status within the international legal system. While many governments have recognised cryptocurrencies as money, others view them as assets that can be traded, like goods or services. Under certain conditions, they may also be treated as investments. This raises the question of how cryptocurrencies should be classified under international law of trade and foreign investment law. The hypothesis is that categorising cryptocurrencies as goods, services, or capital presents challenges in applying traditional international law of trade and foreign investment frameworks. The World Trade Organization, as the most critical component of the international trade regime, lacks explicit rules related to cryptocurrencies. Applying the principles of the national treatment and the most favoured nation within this framework to cryptocurrency-based transactions will encounter obstacles. One of the most significant challenges in classifying cryptocurrencies as foreign capital is determining whether these assets meet the requirements for such classification, regardless of their origin. If cryptocurrencies can be considered securities or telecommunications services, they may be included under the scope of the World Trade Organization's legal system. Additionally, investing in technology such as distributed ledger using cryptocurrencies, purchasing company shares with cryptocurrency, buying equipment for investment purposes, or acquiring AI tokens could all be examples of capital under general investment treaties.

The article is devoted to the assessment of the influence of Russia’s entry to WTO on the sphere of educational services. The author analyzes the specific commitments of the Russian Federation related to incurrence on the General Agreement on Trade in Services during the reform of education legislation. In particular, the rules of the Federal Law «On Education inthe Russian Federation», concerning the educational services, within the context of Russia’sinternational obligations are considered.

A large portion of labor and trade in most countries is devoted to the service sector, and thus service sector impacts are crucial to a full understanding of the effects of WTO membership. The effect of WTO membership on trade volume has been subject to debate in the past, but critically, these studies have failed to examine service sector trade specifically. Conventional wisdom would seem to suggest that WTO membership should have boosted services trade, particularly after the implementation of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in 1995. However, the relationship has yet to be rigorously tested. Here, I use data comprising 178 countries across a span ranging from 1995 until 2015 to examine the impact that WTO membership, and specifically WTO accession, has had on service sector trade levels relative to goods trade levels after the adoption of GATS. Statistical tests yield weak evidence for any significant relationship between WTO membership and service sector trade, with some possible exceptions for states that underwent many rounds of negotiations. This exception is explored further through a comparison of the WTO accessions of China and Vietnam. However, even in these extreme cases, it is difficult to find clear evidence of service sector liberalization. Overall, the findings imply that, in almost all cases, WTO rules and accessions have underemphasized service sector trade in favor of agricultural and goods trade, generating lopsided impacts to trade efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2019 4(3), 881-894 | European Forum Insight of 9 December 2019 | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. - II. Cross-border data transfers in the GDPR. - III. The regime under GATS: MFN, NT and market access vs. adequacy decisions. - III.1. GATS, MFN, NT and market access obligations. - III.2. Justifications. - IV. How do bilateral FTAs address trade and privacy interests? - IV.1. Examples from EUKOR, CETA and EU-Japan FTA. - IV.2. Provisions on Cross-border Data Flows and the Protection of Personal Data and Privacy (2018). - V. Conclusions. | (Abstract) The rapid technological developments and the increasing data flows have not yet been addressed through global coordination. The WTO has so far played a minor role, failing to update its treaties to the new reality of digital trade. To reduce the uncertainty as to the economic and privacy-related impacts of cross-border data flows, governments as well as the European Union have started including this topic and data protection concerns in Free Trade Agreements. This Insight will first investigate how the General Data Protection Regulation rules on the transfer of personal data might conflict with GATS' main commitments, and then consider how the EU has addressed data protection in the context of Free Trade Agreements.

CONTENTS I Introduction 2 II Blockchain as a Digital Trade Issue 3 A The Open Environment of Blockchain 3 B Governmental Responses Shaping the Trajectory of Blockchain 5 III Applying [...], Blockchain technology and the World Trade Organization share the same principles of liberalisation and democratisation of trade. Relying on cross-border data flows and an open environment, blockchain platforms, such as Bitcoin and smart contracts, dispense with a central intermediary and distribute the function of validating transactions to a peer-to-peer network of participants, who maintain and update a record of all transactions in a transparent and immutable distributed ledger. The General Agreement on Trade in Services ('GATS')--as the only multilateral treaty that creates binding international obligations on the treatment to be accorded to service suppliers, including online services--provides a solid foundational framework for services supplied by participants on blockchain, even if, unsurprisingly, several grey areas exist. Applying GATS to blockchain means that many prohibitive regulations imposed by countries--from banning mining to criminalising the possession of cryptocurrencies--may be considered barriers to trade.

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1076 II. THE COMPLEX POLITICAL ECONOMY OF DIGITAL TRADE 1081 III. IMPORTANT GAPS IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE 1088 A. GATS Disciplines Are [...], The World Trade Organization (WTO) has been slow so far in responding to the various challenges arising from the integration of electronic commerce into cross-border trading activities. This slow response in the multilateral system is largely attributable to the complex, multifaceted nature of digital trade or electronic commerce, coupled with the conflict among countries on issues of Internet regulation and digital development. Nonetheless, international trade agreements, particularly at the WTO, play an important role in the creation of a secure, predictable, and trustworthy global regulatory framework for digital trade, and therefore, need to be reformed in a timely and meaningful manner to support the growth of the digital economy. Accordingly, this Article focuses on the limitations of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in liberalizing the digital sector, eliminating new types of barriers to digital trade such as data localization, as well as addressing "new" regulatory issues pertaining to digital trade such as cross-border data flows, data protection, cybersecurity, and online consumer protection. Further, the introduction of comprehensive provisions on such issues in Electronic Commerce Chapters of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) in recent years increases the possibility of a potential discord between PTA rules and the GATS. Moreover, since rules on digital trade are heterogeneous and often conflict across different PTAs, this discord can potentially fragment and disrupt the global framework for digital trade in the long run. Therefore, in the Authors' view, WTO law should take a central role in facilitating a secure and stable legal regulatory environment for cross-border electronic commerce while undercutting the current upswing in digital protectionism. To address the above deficiencies in the GATS, the Authors recommend extensive reforms within the existing multilateral framework rather than simply relying on WTO tribunals to creatively interpret existing rules. The Authors believe three broad areas of reform are necessary in the multilateral framework to promote the digital economy in a holistic and balanced manner--improving market access, addressing regulatory barriers in digital trade, and supporting developing countries to integrate faster into the digital economy. Several of the Member proposals on electronic commerce placed before the WTO Work Programme on Electronic Commerce in recent months provide a useful starting point for constructive dialogue and negotiations at the WTO, particularly in facilitating a sound regulatory framework for cross-border data flows, while enhancing consumer confidence and promoting interests of developing countries and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These reforms can be supported through incremental changes within the GATS framework (such as adoption of domestic regulations under GATS Article VI or development of a Reference Paper or Annex on Electronic Commerce) or through the adoption of a new WTO agreement. In the Authors' view, although the second route is politically more challenging, it is better suited to address the cross-cutting nature of issues in digital trade, as well as to overcome the various challenges arising from the antiquated structure of the GATS. Irrespective of which route is taken for initiating these reforms, the WTO needs to creatively engage with the broader network of institutions dealing with digital trade and internet governance, including multistakeholder institutions, to contribute meaningfully to the formation of a coherent framework for digital trade.

OVERVIEW I. BACKGROUND II. THE TAX CARVE-OUT IN TRADE AGREEMENTS A. The GATS B. Regional Trade Agreements 1. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) 2. The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement [...], This Article examines the conflict between tax and trade law principles in the tax treatment of a non-resident service provider. It explores that conflict through non-discrimination obligations found in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), regional trade agreements, bilateral trade agreements, and tax treaties. The interplay between these agreements has the potential to frustrate trade law objectives because States may impose discriminatory tax measures on non-resident service providers. Tax treaties can play an important role in providing a minimum non-discrimination obligation for tax measures impacting the cross-border trade in services. This Article proposes a new tax treaty non-discrimination obligation grounded in trade law principles.

CONTENTS I Introduction 374 II Scope of Services Chapters in Australia's PTAs 377 III Core Services Obligations in Australia's PTAs 378 A Non Discrimination, Market Access and Local Presence: Listing [...], Trade in services can take many forms (or 'modes'), such as cross border delivery, or delivery by a commercial presence in a foreign country. Unlike tariffs or quantitative restrictions on goods, which are imposed at the border, barriers to trade in services are more commonly found 'behind the border', through domestic regulation of services industries. This article reviews Australia's obligations to liberalise trade in services under its preferential trade agreements, against the background of its obligations under the World Trade Organization 's General Agreement on Trade in Services ('GATS'). Australia has an evident desire to liberalise trade in services as well as sensibilities about domestic regulatory autonomy in the services context. The tension between these different interests is reflected in the ongoing development of Australia's treaty practice in this field. The article summarises core obligations and exceptions under Australia's treaties, highlighting the need for progressive liberalisation and the possibility and desirability of reducing some exceptions over time. The article distinguishes 'positive' and 'negative' list obligations and Australia's approach thereto, while also raising questions as to the consistency of Australia's preferential trade agreements with the GATS, particularly as regards 'GATS minus' provisions.

Table of Contents I Introduction II Restrictions on Cross-Border Data Transfers and their Underlying Rationales A Storing Data Locally to Protect National Security B Preventing Access to Certain Online Content [...], The transfer of data across borders supports trade in most service industries around the world as well as the growth of traditional manufacturing sectors. However, several countries have begun to adopt laws impeding the cross-border transfer of data, ostensibly in pursuit of policy objectives such as national security, public morals or public order, and privacy. Such domestic measures create potential concerns under both international trade law and international investment law. Accordingly, recent trade and investment negotiations such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) include specific provisions mandating the permissibility of cross-border data transfer and prohibiting data localization in certain circumstances. Although World Trade Organization law contains no such specific provisions, restrictive data transfer measures could breach the non-discrimination and market access disciplines under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), except to the extent that they are justified under the general exception in GATS art. XIV. International investment law may also apply to measures restricting data transfer, particularly if investment arbitrators take into account holistic changes in the digital economy to interpret the scope of covered investments and the meaning of investment obligations. The application of general trade and investment law disciplines to data transfer restrictions and localization requirements remain uncertain. The more specific provisions in the TPP, while welcome, fail to address this uncertainty. These fields must be better synchronized with each other in respect of data transfer and with the realities of the digital economy. A comprehensive legal framework--including coverage of trade and investment law--and extensive policy coordination across a variety of stakeholders would better enable open, secure and efficient data flows across borders.

I. May a WTO Member Prohibit the Transfer of Personal Data from its Territory? II. The WTO's Trade in Services Framework A. General and Specific Obligations B. General Exception for [...]

The variety of investments made by powerful Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) is often directed to the globally booming service sector which is regulated by the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). This paper analyses the scope, substance and procedural rights which may benefit SWFs. The basic principles of World Trade Organization (WTO) law provide a legal framework for regulating SWF investment while the members’ specific commitments may provide significant liberalization. These positive elements for SWFs are tempered by the existence of exceptions and the relative shortcomings of state-to-state dispute settlement in the WTO and the lack of retroactive remedy. However, the paper shows that far from being perfect and complete, the GATS provides an international basis for SWFs to devise their investment strategies and an ideal forum in which to obtain further liberalization in current negotiations.

O autor, um dos promotores do debate no Brasil sobre o impacto na educação de medidas tomadas pela OMC, indaga se é possível manter a idéia de que o ensino superior é um bem público preconizada pela Conferência Mundial sobre o Ensino Superior, em Paris, em 1998. A comunidade acadêmica perdeu a oportunidade de reagir eficazmente, quando, em 1994, foi aprovado o Acordo Geral sobre Comércio e Serviços (AGCS). No entanto, a existência de provedores privados não torna um serviço comercial. Persistem as figuras da concessão, delegação ou autorização, mantidos, sob regulamentação, os princípios básicos que protegem os bens públicos. Na OMC, os países anglo-saxônicos agem de forma incoerente, mantendo fechadas as portas que pedem aos demais para abrir. O grande perigo, no momento, está na tentativa de se criar um sistema internacional de acreditação, sem participação da América Latina.One of the promoters of the Brazilian debate on the impact on education of the measures taken by the WTO, the author wonders whether we can still maintain the idea that higher education is a public good, as advocated by the World Conference on Higher Education in Paris, 1998. The academic community lost the opportunity to react efficiently when, in 1994, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) was signed. Yet, private providers are not enough to make a service commercial. Although the basic principles protecting the public goods are maintained under regulation, the figures of concession, delegation and authorization persist. Within the WTO, the Anglo-Saxon countries act inconsistently, closing the very doors they ask the others to open. The bigger danger, nowadays, is an attempt to create an international accreditation system, without the participation of Latin America

This panel was convened at 2:30 pm, Friday, April 11, by its moderator, Gary N. Horlick of the Law Offices of Gary N. Horlick, Georgetown University Law Center, and the [...]

CONTENTS I Introduction II Background and Summary of the Dispute III Is a Film a 'Good' or a 'Service'? The Technological Bias and Neutrality of GATT and GATS A Distinguishing [...]

This panel was convened at 10:45 a.m., Thursday, March 25, by its moderator, James Thuo Gathii of Albany Law School, who introduced the panelists: Michael Santoro of Rutgers Business School; [...]