Editing World Trade Organization (section)

== Criticism ==
{{Main|Criticism of the World Trade Organization}}
{{See also|1999 Seattle WTO protests}}
{{multiple image
 | width = 220
 | direction = vertical
 | image1 = World Trade Organization - Session 87 Indigenous trade sharing experiences and possibilities, 12 September 2024 (53991581051).jpg
 | image2 = Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala takes over as new WTO Director-General, 1 March 2021 (50993530301).jpg
 | footer = Whether in conference sessions or through public engagements, discussion of difficult topics can lead to more awareness and possible solutions for all stakeholders.
}}
Although tariffs and other trade barriers have been significantly reduced thanks to GATT and WTO, the promise that free trade will accelerate economic growth, reduce poverty, and increase people's incomes has been questioned by many critics.<ref name=":7">{{Cite book|last1=Joseph|first1=Sarah|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-U_1KMg6GkgC|title=Blame it on the WTO?: A Human Rights Critique|last2=Joseph|first2=Sarah Louise|year=2011|publisher=OUP Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-956589-4|pages=164–167|language=en|access-date=23 August 2020|archive-date=14 February 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240214033000/https://books.google.com/books?id=-U_1KMg6GkgC|url-status=live}}</ref> 

Economist [[Ha-Joon Chang]] argues that there is a "paradox" in neo-liberal beliefs regarding free trade because the economic growth of developing countries was higher in the 1960–1980 period compared to the 1980–2000 period even though its trade policies are now far more liberal than before. Also, there are results of research that show that new countries actively reduce trade barriers only after becoming significantly rich. From the results of the study, WTO critics argue that trade liberalization does not guarantee economic growth and certainly not poverty alleviation.<ref name=":7" /> He also cites the example of [[El Salvador]]; in the early 1990s, El Salvador removed all quantitative barriers to imports and also cut tariffs. However, the country's economic growth remained weak. On the other hand, [[Vietnam]], which only began reforming its economy in the late 1980s, saw a great deal of success by deciding to follow [[Chinese economic reform|China's economic model]] and liberalizing slowly along with implementing safeguards for domestic commerce. Vietnam has largely succeeded in accelerating economic growth and reducing poverty without immediately removing substantial trade barriers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://dev.wcfia.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Rodrick_HowToSave.pdf|title=How to Save Globilization From Its Cheerleaders |date=8 February 2016|page=14|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160208100820/http://dev.wcfia.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Rodrick_HowToSave.pdf|archive-date=8 February 2016|access-date=19 May 2020}}</ref><ref name=":7" />

Critics also put forward the view that the benefits derived from WTO facilitated free trade are not shared equally.<ref name="Polity"/> This criticism is usually supported by historical accounts of the outcomes of negotiations and/or data showing that the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen, especially in [[China]] and [[India]], where economic inequality was growing at the time even though economic growth is very high.<ref name=":7" /> In addition, WTO approaches aiming to reduce trade barriers can harm developing countries. Trade liberalization that is too early without any prominent domestic barriers is feared to trap the developing economies in the primary sector, which often does not require skilled labor. And when these developing countries decide to advance their economy utilizing industrialization, the premature domestic industry cannot immediately skyrocket as expected, making it difficult to compete with other countries whose industries are more advanced.<ref name=":8">{{Cite book|last1=Joseph|first1=Sarah|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-U_1KMg6GkgC|title=Blame it on the WTO?: A Human Rights Critique|last2=Joseph|first2=Sarah Louise|date=2011|publisher=OUP Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-956589-4|pages=171–174|language=en|access-date=23 August 2020|archive-date=14 February 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240214033000/https://books.google.com/books?id=-U_1KMg6GkgC|url-status=live}}</ref>