At the risk of over-simplifying, we could say that we had a system designed to tackle the elimination of tariffs, but not one optimised to address the complex tangle of non-tariff barriers and agricultural and industrial policies that influence trade flows to differing degrees. It is thus necessary to make changes to the multilateral system that prevent trade-distorting practices and, at the same time, to adapt this institution both to the new circumstances and 3  to the new challenges posed by e-commerce and the protection of intellectual property, among others. One of the biggest future challenges, then, for the WTO and, generally, for the system of international institutions is how to change so as to be able to integrate the major global players: one (the United States) is tempted by bilateralism and the other (China) by retaining a model of State capitalism that is hardly compatible in the medium term with an open world subject to multilateral rules. The EU, long-accustomed to preventing the heterogeneity of their economies from hampering the progress brought by economic integration, must take an essential lead on this matter. The WTO’s conflict-resolution system has been pivotal to the sound functioning and predictability of the system. And this is why a solution must be found to the current blocking of appointments to the Appellate Body. Significantly, a system of trade relations based exclusively on bilateral agreements is not the best solution. These usually give rise to a degree of “trade deviation” that detracts overall from the positive effects of “trade creation”.

By way of example, we need to design mechanisms so that large multinationals, particularly in the technological field, do not ultimately pose a risk to market competition conditions and so they may contribute to the sustainability of the welfare system. In this connection, the OECD is currently spearheading initiatives to improve the taxation of these companies. Another good example of the importance of concerted action concerns the need to urgently tackle the consequences of climate change. c. The case of the Economic and Monetary Union The Economic and Monetary Union is a good example of the dual need to improve the governance framework and, in parallel, to apply policies at the national level enabling growth and citizens’ well-being to increase. 5  In fact, despite the improvements made in the past decade, it is vital to strengthen European integration, especially through the completion of the EMU governance reforms. Specifically, as I have said on various occasions2, we must move promptly towards creating a single capital market and completing the Banking Union. These two initiatives are key both to the financing of investment and business innovation and to achieving a more robust and resilient monetary union in the face of adverse shocks. The Banking Union is a crucially important and far-reaching project for European construction. And this is why it is essential not to leave it unfinished. Following the start-up of the Single Supervision Mechanism and the Single Resolution Fund, efforts should focus on reaching an agreement on the launch of the European Deposit Insurance Scheme.