February 2021
Susan Ariel Aaronson and Thomas Struett
Abstract: For 22 years, the members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been discussing how to govern e-commerce and the data that underpins it. In 2019, some 74 (now 86) nations began to negotiate e-commerce. These talks are conducted in secret and little is known about how they are progressing. However, WTO members issued a wide range of public comments on both the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and the Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on Electronic Commerce from 1998, when the work program began, to the present. These communications provide context as well as a window into the negotiations. Using qualitative techniques to analyze these communications, the authors found that throughout the 22-year period, member states were divided by their understanding, capacity and willingness to set rules governing e-commerce or digital trade. Members had divergent views on: whether or not to extend the moratorium on customs duties (although they have consistently extended it); how best to nurture the digital economy and what role trade agreements should play in governing it; and the ability of all WTO member states to participate effectively in these talks. Many countries had e-commerce expertise, but they did not have a wide range of firms with digital prowess. Moreover, many of the WTO member states did not have expertise governing various types of data. In short, data, digital prowess and data governance expertise were creating division among members. To bridge this divide, this paper offers three suggestions: First, donor nations should provide funds and expertise to help developing and middle-income nations build a data-driven economy. Second, digital trade/e-commerce agreements should be designed to enable more people to benefit from data-driven growth while simultaneously setting rules to govern digital trade that facilitate trust and predictability among market actors. To that end, the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA), an agreement among New Zealand, Chile and Singapore, provides a good model of such collaboration and rule-setting. Third, as data governance has become a key issue for development, development organizations should define what comprehensive data governance looks like at the national level. Development organizations should next examine how they can help developing countries achieve flexible and technologically neutral governance. These organizations should also provide financial and technical assistance to help developing countries build data governance skill.
JEL Codes:
Key Words: trade, digital trade, data, development
