How Do the Third Parties Contribute to WTO Dispute Resolution?

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of World Trade Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.54648/trad2022024
J. Ryu
{"title":"How Do the Third Parties Contribute to WTO Dispute Resolution?","authors":"J. Ryu","doi":"10.54648/trad2022024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"World Trade Organization (WTO) judicial bodies face dual obstacles because of their limited legal authority: they do not have the power to investigate members, so they depend primarily on submissions from disputants. They have no authority to sanction members directly, so they rely on decentralized enforcement. The legalization of the trade regime depends on consent and voluntary compliance. This article focuses on the role of third parties in the dispute settlement process and investigates how they contribute to the legalization of the WTO. I use an original dataset covering all WTO disputes from 1995 to 2012, containing unusually detailed information about the number of third parties, the total dispute settlement period, and the final stage that disputants use, etc. In contrast to the existing literature, which characterizes third parties as spoilers that prevent early settlement, I find that WTO third parties have heterogeneous motivations for participation; moreover, participation by third parties with differing motivations has different effects on dispute settlement and compliance. In particular, third parties that claim to have ‘systemic interests’–a legal designation that allows them to participate despite their negligible stakes in a dispute–have considerable influence on dispute resolution. Specifically: (1) their briefs provide higher-quality information than other third-party briefs to panels and the Appellate Body; (2) they help to accelerate dispute settlement; and (3) their participation makes respondents more likely to comply with panel and Appellate Body rulings.\nWTO, third parties, trade disputes, legalization, trade laws, systemic interests, panels, Appellate Body","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

World Trade Organization (WTO) judicial bodies face dual obstacles because of their limited legal authority: they do not have the power to investigate members, so they depend primarily on submissions from disputants. They have no authority to sanction members directly, so they rely on decentralized enforcement. The legalization of the trade regime depends on consent and voluntary compliance. This article focuses on the role of third parties in the dispute settlement process and investigates how they contribute to the legalization of the WTO. I use an original dataset covering all WTO disputes from 1995 to 2012, containing unusually detailed information about the number of third parties, the total dispute settlement period, and the final stage that disputants use, etc. In contrast to the existing literature, which characterizes third parties as spoilers that prevent early settlement, I find that WTO third parties have heterogeneous motivations for participation; moreover, participation by third parties with differing motivations has different effects on dispute settlement and compliance. In particular, third parties that claim to have ‘systemic interests’–a legal designation that allows them to participate despite their negligible stakes in a dispute–have considerable influence on dispute resolution. Specifically: (1) their briefs provide higher-quality information than other third-party briefs to panels and the Appellate Body; (2) they help to accelerate dispute settlement; and (3) their participation makes respondents more likely to comply with panel and Appellate Body rulings. WTO, third parties, trade disputes, legalization, trade laws, systemic interests, panels, Appellate Body
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第三方如何参与WTO争端解决?
世界贸易组织(世贸组织)司法机构由于其有限的法律权限而面临双重障碍:它们无权调查成员,因此主要依赖争议方的意见书。他们没有直接制裁成员的权力,因此他们依靠分散的执法。贸易制度的合法化取决于同意和自愿遵守。本文关注第三方在争端解决过程中的作用,并调查它们如何为世贸组织的合法化做出贡献。我使用了一个涵盖1995年至2012年世贸组织所有争端的原始数据集,其中包含关于第三方数量、争端解决总期限和争端方使用的最后阶段等异常详细的信息。与现有文献相比,现有文献将第三方定性为阻碍提前解决的破坏者,我发现,世贸组织第三方参与的动机各不相同;此外,具有不同动机的第三方的参与对争端解决和遵守有不同的影响。特别是,声称拥有“系统性利益”的第三方——这是一种法律指定,允许他们参与,尽管他们在争端中的利害关系微不足道——对争端解决有相当大的影响。具体而言:(1)他们的案情摘要向小组和上诉机构提供的信息质量高于其他第三方案情摘要;(2) 它们有助于加快争端的解决;以及(3)他们的参与使被告更有可能遵守小组和上诉机构的裁决。WTO、第三方、贸易争端、合法化、贸易法、系统利益、小组、上诉机构
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
期刊最新文献
Rethinking Test Data Protection in China-US Trade War: Integrating Empirical and Normative Analysis The WTO and Using Digital Economy Technologies: Surviving the Race With Preferential Trade Agreements A Tale of Too Little: Anti-dumping Tariff Between SAFTA Contracting Parties Game Analysis of Different Source Disclosure Model for Genetic Resources and Implications for China Improving Export Credit Agency Impact Through Full Faith and Credit
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1