She told the Financial Times on Wednesday: “It may be that this grand-scale agreements format that we have been operating under since 1947 is obsolete”, a description she quickly amended to “needs to be reviewed”.As she also told the Wall Street Journal:
"In the future, we could have a global trade round, but we'd probably have a building block process, agreeing on issues one by one, instead of waiting until you've agreed on everything," she said.The Financial Times itself is calling for a new approach - Editorial comment - Multilateralism not dead as a Doha:
The WTO should try two things: first, take on smaller, more manageable legislative projects among coalitions of the willing; second, try to extend consistent rules over more of the existing system.
For the first project, it could start by gathering together the few countries that dominate world trade in services and hammering out a standalone deal in sectors where it can find convergence. Last weekend’s fruitful services talks were an encouraging sign, especially now that developing countries such as India are powerful service exporters as well as importers. The benefits, on the model of the successful Information Technology Agreement of 1996, would then be extended to all WTO members. Several parts of the Doha deal such as export subsidies and “trade facilitation” (getting goods easily across borders) might also be agreed separately.
And the Wall Street Journal also raises the idea - Trade Talks' Failure Weighs on Other Issues:
Future trade deals may focus more on narrower national interests, rather than Doha-style talks that call for countries to make concessions in one area to make gains in another. One possible model is a kind of "coalition of the willing" approach. The model is the Information Technology Agreement signed in 1996, which set zero tariffs on new technology goods for countries that signed on. About half the WTO's members have done so.
So -- maybe a "intangibles trade" negotiations?