Pub Date : 2020-02-24DOI: 10.1108/jitlp-10-2019-0063
D. Chakraborty, J. Chaisse, Shameek Pahari
This paper aims to analyze whether the domestic policy reforms in India would suffice, or there is a need to conform to stricter international standards as well. The paper is arranged along the following lines. First, the paper offers a brief review of the cooperation in the field of harmonization of vehicle regulations which is provided by the so-called WP.29 Forum. Second, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) standards and their membership along with Indian participation in the forum are presented. Third, reforms in India through the “Make in India” (MII) initiative and its trade in the auto-component segment are analyzed. Fourth, the possible non-tariff barriers (NTBs) on imports of auto-components in select partner countries is computed and presented. Fifth, the penetration pattern of partner countries in India’s automotive sector export value chain is analyzed. Finally, based on the observations, key policy conclusions are drawn both from global and Indian perspectives.,This paper blends expertise in law and economics and enables readers to have a finer understanding of the automotive sector which is one of the most internationalized product groups in world trade, characterized by not only cross-border movement of final products, but also of intermediate products like auto-parts and components as well as major global investment and relocation decisions. This paper focuses on India for four crucial reasons, which makes India both a key player (and potential disruptor) at global level and the rather complex approach chosen by the country vis-a-vis many regulations (including UNECE and WTO), reflecting its tendency to rely on domestic consolidation through measures such as the 2014 MII initiative.,The data analysis in the current paper indicates that after conforming to the UNECE 1998 standard, India’s relative trade with these countries has increased both in terms of auto-components and automobile products. Moreover, the value contribution from these partner countries in India’s exports is rising. On the other hand, the relative share of the UNECE 1958 countries in India’s trade basket has declined and a mixed trend is noticed for the common contracting parties (CPs). In addition, the share of the countries without accession to any of the UNECE agreements in India’s trade has shown an upward trend. The observation indicates that the divergence in automotive product standards might crucially influence India’s trade flows. It seems that in the short run, an orientation for exporting to UNECE 1998 partners and non-members emerges as a dominant strategy, underlining a specialization in medium-quality segment. Nevertheless, the long-term robustness of such a move deserves closer analysis, particularly by focusing on whether India may need to join the UNECE 1958 agreement to sustain its export growth. Before joining UNECE 1998, the sector has enjoyed protection through high tariff barriers. Given the differing perspective on ope
{"title":"Global auto industry and product standards","authors":"D. Chakraborty, J. Chaisse, Shameek Pahari","doi":"10.1108/jitlp-10-2019-0063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-10-2019-0063","url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to analyze whether the domestic policy reforms in India would suffice, or there is a need to conform to stricter international standards as well. The paper is arranged along the following lines. First, the paper offers a brief review of the cooperation in the field of harmonization of vehicle regulations which is provided by the so-called WP.29 Forum. Second, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) standards and their membership along with Indian participation in the forum are presented. Third, reforms in India through the “Make in India” (MII) initiative and its trade in the auto-component segment are analyzed. Fourth, the possible non-tariff barriers (NTBs) on imports of auto-components in select partner countries is computed and presented. Fifth, the penetration pattern of partner countries in India’s automotive sector export value chain is analyzed. Finally, based on the observations, key policy conclusions are drawn both from global and Indian perspectives.,This paper blends expertise in law and economics and enables readers to have a finer understanding of the automotive sector which is one of the most internationalized product groups in world trade, characterized by not only cross-border movement of final products, but also of intermediate products like auto-parts and components as well as major global investment and relocation decisions. This paper focuses on India for four crucial reasons, which makes India both a key player (and potential disruptor) at global level and the rather complex approach chosen by the country vis-a-vis many regulations (including UNECE and WTO), reflecting its tendency to rely on domestic consolidation through measures such as the 2014 MII initiative.,The data analysis in the current paper indicates that after conforming to the UNECE 1998 standard, India’s relative trade with these countries has increased both in terms of auto-components and automobile products. Moreover, the value contribution from these partner countries in India’s exports is rising. On the other hand, the relative share of the UNECE 1958 countries in India’s trade basket has declined and a mixed trend is noticed for the common contracting parties (CPs). In addition, the share of the countries without accession to any of the UNECE agreements in India’s trade has shown an upward trend. The observation indicates that the divergence in automotive product standards might crucially influence India’s trade flows. It seems that in the short run, an orientation for exporting to UNECE 1998 partners and non-members emerges as a dominant strategy, underlining a specialization in medium-quality segment. Nevertheless, the long-term robustness of such a move deserves closer analysis, particularly by focusing on whether India may need to join the UNECE 1958 agreement to sustain its export growth. Before joining UNECE 1998, the sector has enjoyed protection through high tariff barriers. Given the differing perspective on ope","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2020-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/jitlp-10-2019-0063","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41952744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-16DOI: 10.1108/jitlp-09-2019-0060
Prashant Desai, Robert M. Feinberg
Purpose The issue of substitutability between various modes of import protection has been studied by economists in various ways. Since President Donald Trump came into office and soon started imposing tariffs, the need by US firms to file antidumping (AD) cases would seem to have been reduced. This study aims to examine whether such a reduction in AD cases has occurred. Design/methodology/approach Quarterly US AD filings via a negative binomial regression analysis are explained. Patterns based on data from 1995 through 2016 are obtained first and then predict US AD petitions for 2017 and 2018. Findings The authors reject a hypothesis of substitution away from AD in the Trump era of general protectionism but do find some support for the notion that protection moves downstream, with greater than predicted AD filings in downstream metals sectors. Originality/value This is the first study to examine the possibility of trade policy substitutability in the Trump era.
{"title":"Are US antidumping cases being crowded out by other forms of protectionism?","authors":"Prashant Desai, Robert M. Feinberg","doi":"10.1108/jitlp-09-2019-0060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-09-2019-0060","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000The issue of substitutability between various modes of import protection has been studied by economists in various ways. Since President Donald Trump came into office and soon started imposing tariffs, the need by US firms to file antidumping (AD) cases would seem to have been reduced. This study aims to examine whether such a reduction in AD cases has occurred.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000Quarterly US AD filings via a negative binomial regression analysis are explained. Patterns based on data from 1995 through 2016 are obtained first and then predict US AD petitions for 2017 and 2018.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The authors reject a hypothesis of substitution away from AD in the Trump era of general protectionism but do find some support for the notion that protection moves downstream, with greater than predicted AD filings in downstream metals sectors.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000This is the first study to examine the possibility of trade policy substitutability in the Trump era.\u0000","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/jitlp-09-2019-0060","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44137785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-15DOI: 10.1108/jitlp-05-2019-0022
Rao Qasim Idrees, R. Shapiee, Haniff Ahamat
The phenomena of arbitral forum shopping to resolve a commercial investment dispute is still under development and more complicated in many states. However, for Pakistan, it seems in an evolutionary phase, where the country is struggling hard to adopt the best practice of dispute resolution through forum shopping clauses. This struggle is even more inflated with huge Chinese investment through China Pakistan economic corridor (CPEC) projects in Pakistan, which come alongside with commercial investment disputes. For this purpose, the current treaty or contract-based system between China and Pakistan and litigation based domestic civil court structure look obsolete, hence, appear to require reinstatement of forum shopping clauses under concerned treaties or contracts for CPEC investment-related issues.,The authors choose a legal research method. The research design is a comparative analysis between CPEC contracts and dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan and also the domestic civil court’s litigation system. This analysis selected by the authors due to inefficient bilateral investment arrangements and efficient resolution of future commercial disputes in CPEC. While the international arbitration system is included in the assessment were particular in the time and space context. The comparison comprises on dispute resolution clauses in free trade agreement (FTA) and bilateral investment treaties (BIT) between China and Pakistan and the system of resolving disputes by CPEC clauses.,The authors finds that in the absence of CPEC forum shopping clause under dispute resolution system, Pakistan is highly at risk to lose foreign investors, and therefore, set back the goal of long term economic sustainability in the region. However, China has already made its investment policies safer with establishing three international commercial courts (also referred to as Belt and Road courts), one in Xi’an for the land-based Silk Road Economic Belt, one in Shenzhen for the Maritime Silk Road and one in Beijing that will serve as the headquarters. These courts will be offering litigation, arbitration and mediation services. According to one view, China aims to have all belt and road initiative (BRI) disputes resolved by these courts. This makes Pakistan position more awkward and needs proactive measures, as CPEC investment is based on Pakistan foreign direct investment policies and legal structure. Therefore, it will be complicated and less favourable for Pakistan to deal with such cases under Chinese Courts.,The paper’s primary contribution is finding that comprehensive analysis of alternative dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan over CPEC investment is inevitable. A socio-legal research combine with an examination of Singapore International Commercial Court functions and mechanism and CPEC plans further contributes to ascertain the best model of the settlement of commercial disputes under investments in Pakistan. This research pap
{"title":"Paradigm shift; the emergence of arbitral forum shopping in CPEC investment disputes","authors":"Rao Qasim Idrees, R. Shapiee, Haniff Ahamat","doi":"10.1108/jitlp-05-2019-0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-05-2019-0022","url":null,"abstract":"The phenomena of arbitral forum shopping to resolve a commercial investment dispute is still under development and more complicated in many states. However, for Pakistan, it seems in an evolutionary phase, where the country is struggling hard to adopt the best practice of dispute resolution through forum shopping clauses. This struggle is even more inflated with huge Chinese investment through China Pakistan economic corridor (CPEC) projects in Pakistan, which come alongside with commercial investment disputes. For this purpose, the current treaty or contract-based system between China and Pakistan and litigation based domestic civil court structure look obsolete, hence, appear to require reinstatement of forum shopping clauses under concerned treaties or contracts for CPEC investment-related issues.,The authors choose a legal research method. The research design is a comparative analysis between CPEC contracts and dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan and also the domestic civil court’s litigation system. This analysis selected by the authors due to inefficient bilateral investment arrangements and efficient resolution of future commercial disputes in CPEC. While the international arbitration system is included in the assessment were particular in the time and space context. The comparison comprises on dispute resolution clauses in free trade agreement (FTA) and bilateral investment treaties (BIT) between China and Pakistan and the system of resolving disputes by CPEC clauses.,The authors finds that in the absence of CPEC forum shopping clause under dispute resolution system, Pakistan is highly at risk to lose foreign investors, and therefore, set back the goal of long term economic sustainability in the region. However, China has already made its investment policies safer with establishing three international commercial courts (also referred to as Belt and Road courts), one in Xi’an for the land-based Silk Road Economic Belt, one in Shenzhen for the Maritime Silk Road and one in Beijing that will serve as the headquarters. These courts will be offering litigation, arbitration and mediation services. According to one view, China aims to have all belt and road initiative (BRI) disputes resolved by these courts. This makes Pakistan position more awkward and needs proactive measures, as CPEC investment is based on Pakistan foreign direct investment policies and legal structure. Therefore, it will be complicated and less favourable for Pakistan to deal with such cases under Chinese Courts.,The paper’s primary contribution is finding that comprehensive analysis of alternative dispute resolution mechanism between China and Pakistan over CPEC investment is inevitable. A socio-legal research combine with an examination of Singapore International Commercial Court functions and mechanism and CPEC plans further contributes to ascertain the best model of the settlement of commercial disputes under investments in Pakistan. This research pap","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/jitlp-05-2019-0022","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46156251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-15DOI: 10.1108/jitlp-06-2019-0037
Nida Rahman, M. N. Rahman
Globalisation has remained a subjective term as the magnitude unfolded. Every new decade witnesses new opportunities for global integration of the economies. One among such initiatives, it is argued, is the One Belt One Road initiative of the People’s Republic of China. It is assumed to be beneficial for the world and at least for the region, if not to say more. The world has witnessed efforts and trends of protectionism as well, but China comes up with new vigour. One Belt One Road has entered into consistent talks and deliberations at the world level. It is therefore imperative to identify the emerging linkages between the participant countries in One Belt One Road. This study aims to take up the task of enquiring about the effect of One Belt One Road on the gravity between China and the nations of Eurasia. This study looks for the realisation of the expected economic ties and internationalisation emerging from One Belt One Road and the evidence for the same. This will be identified in the present study. The paper also attempts to theorise a model for One Belt One Road.,This study takes up the task of enquiring about the effect of One Belt One Road on the gravity between China and the nations of Eurasia. The hypothesised economic ties and internationalisation will be a reality or not. And what are the evidences for the same. This will be identified in the proposed study. An attempt to theorise the model for One Belt One Road is also taken.,It is perceived that the mega project would fill the wedge between China and Eurasia and convergence will follow with the start of the One Belt One Road.,The emergence of China in the global world order as the initiator of mega deals and projects and its dominion in every realm of economic activity is a topic of scrutiny for the entire world. In this context, the One Belt One Road initiative offers huge potential for exploration. As the project is in its early stages of planning and execution, its prospects of tying entire Europe and Russia with China through two of the revived ancient routes are essential to the entire world.
{"title":"One Belt One Road: will it increase the gravity between China and Eurasia","authors":"Nida Rahman, M. N. Rahman","doi":"10.1108/jitlp-06-2019-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-06-2019-0037","url":null,"abstract":"Globalisation has remained a subjective term as the magnitude unfolded. Every new decade witnesses new opportunities for global integration of the economies. One among such initiatives, it is argued, is the One Belt One Road initiative of the People’s Republic of China. It is assumed to be beneficial for the world and at least for the region, if not to say more. The world has witnessed efforts and trends of protectionism as well, but China comes up with new vigour. One Belt One Road has entered into consistent talks and deliberations at the world level. It is therefore imperative to identify the emerging linkages between the participant countries in One Belt One Road. This study aims to take up the task of enquiring about the effect of One Belt One Road on the gravity between China and the nations of Eurasia. This study looks for the realisation of the expected economic ties and internationalisation emerging from One Belt One Road and the evidence for the same. This will be identified in the present study. The paper also attempts to theorise a model for One Belt One Road.,This study takes up the task of enquiring about the effect of One Belt One Road on the gravity between China and the nations of Eurasia. The hypothesised economic ties and internationalisation will be a reality or not. And what are the evidences for the same. This will be identified in the proposed study. An attempt to theorise the model for One Belt One Road is also taken.,It is perceived that the mega project would fill the wedge between China and Eurasia and convergence will follow with the start of the One Belt One Road.,The emergence of China in the global world order as the initiator of mega deals and projects and its dominion in every realm of economic activity is a topic of scrutiny for the entire world. In this context, the One Belt One Road initiative offers huge potential for exploration. As the project is in its early stages of planning and execution, its prospects of tying entire Europe and Russia with China through two of the revived ancient routes are essential to the entire world.","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/jitlp-06-2019-0037","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42018650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-15DOI: 10.1108/JITLP-02-2019-0011
T. A. Adekola
The paper is prompted by the US–China trade war and its implications for the sustenance of the multilateral trading system. The two rivals resorted to “self-help” without recourse to the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system, flouting the WTO as an adjudicator in trade disputes. This paper aims to analyze the drawbacks in the settlement system and examines the urgent need for a retroactive remedy.,This paper adopts desk-review and jurisprudential analysis of the relevant rulings of the WTO dispute settlement body. Using desk-review, primary sources such as the relevant domestic legislations invoked by the USA and China to trigger the trade war were discussed and critically analyzed.,This paper finds that the unilateral and protectionist actions that characterize the trade war can be linked to the loss of confidence in WTO remedies to redress members’ retroactive economic losses. This finding is useful in arguing for the incorporation of a retrospective monetary remedy to forestall the reoccurrence of a similar trade war and save the WTO from being dysfunctional.,Although, whether there should be retroactive remedies in the settlement system has been long debated, this paper makes a significant contribution by highlighting why the drawbacks in the settlement system have become so prominent in the context of this trade war. This paper strengthens the urgent need for WTO dispute settlement reform to prevent a reoccurrence of another global distortion of trade.
{"title":"US–China trade war and the WTO dispute settlement mechanism","authors":"T. A. Adekola","doi":"10.1108/JITLP-02-2019-0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-02-2019-0011","url":null,"abstract":"The paper is prompted by the US–China trade war and its implications for the sustenance of the multilateral trading system. The two rivals resorted to “self-help” without recourse to the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system, flouting the WTO as an adjudicator in trade disputes. This paper aims to analyze the drawbacks in the settlement system and examines the urgent need for a retroactive remedy.,This paper adopts desk-review and jurisprudential analysis of the relevant rulings of the WTO dispute settlement body. Using desk-review, primary sources such as the relevant domestic legislations invoked by the USA and China to trigger the trade war were discussed and critically analyzed.,This paper finds that the unilateral and protectionist actions that characterize the trade war can be linked to the loss of confidence in WTO remedies to redress members’ retroactive economic losses. This finding is useful in arguing for the incorporation of a retrospective monetary remedy to forestall the reoccurrence of a similar trade war and save the WTO from being dysfunctional.,Although, whether there should be retroactive remedies in the settlement system has been long debated, this paper makes a significant contribution by highlighting why the drawbacks in the settlement system have become so prominent in the context of this trade war. This paper strengthens the urgent need for WTO dispute settlement reform to prevent a reoccurrence of another global distortion of trade.","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-02-2019-0011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44370395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-01DOI: 10.36514/itl.2019..145.001
Sanghan Wang
{"title":"부당지원행위와 정상가격","authors":"Sanghan Wang","doi":"10.36514/itl.2019..145.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36514/itl.2019..145.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81393404","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-01DOI: 10.36514/itl.2019..145.002
sun-ok kim
{"title":"물품검사 및 부적합 통지요건의 운용원리와 실무적 가치 - CISG 중심으로 -","authors":"sun-ok kim","doi":"10.36514/itl.2019..145.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36514/itl.2019..145.002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86483719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-08-01DOI: 10.36514/itl.2019..144.003
노유경
{"title":"WTO 분쟁해결기구 최신 동향","authors":"노유경","doi":"10.36514/itl.2019..144.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36514/itl.2019..144.003","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74707375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-08-01DOI: 10.36514/itl.2019..144.001
장지상
{"title":"일본의 수출규제와 우리의 대응","authors":"장지상","doi":"10.36514/itl.2019..144.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36514/itl.2019..144.001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74117273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-06-17DOI: 10.1108/JITLP-11-2018-0053
Roberto Soprano
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the pros and cons of different models of the European Union (EU)-style Rules of Origin (RoO) that could be chosen by negotiators for a future UK–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA). It will also underline the impact that any choice would have on economic operators and certain criteria that should be evaluated before taking any decisions on the adoption of RoO. Design/methodology/approach The paper will describe three different RoO models that could be chosen by negotiators. For each of them, it analyses the pros and cons and the impact on economic operators. Findings The choice of a RoO would have an impact on future EU–UK trade relations. It will affect the utilization rate of the FTA as well as investment (and divestment) corporate strategies in the UK and EU. Originality/value The paper introduces different criteria to evaluate the impact of RoO that should be taken into consideration by negotiators. It emphasizes that RoO should be simple, predictable, coherent, IT compatible and easily adaptable.
{"title":"Brexit and the EU–UK free trade agreement: dos and don’ts when drafting rules of origin","authors":"Roberto Soprano","doi":"10.1108/JITLP-11-2018-0053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-11-2018-0053","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Purpose\u0000The purpose of this paper is to highlight the pros and cons of different models of the European Union (EU)-style Rules of Origin (RoO) that could be chosen by negotiators for a future UK–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA). It will also underline the impact that any choice would have on economic operators and certain criteria that should be evaluated before taking any decisions on the adoption of RoO.\u0000\u0000\u0000Design/methodology/approach\u0000The paper will describe three different RoO models that could be chosen by negotiators. For each of them, it analyses the pros and cons and the impact on economic operators.\u0000\u0000\u0000Findings\u0000The choice of a RoO would have an impact on future EU–UK trade relations. It will affect the utilization rate of the FTA as well as investment (and divestment) corporate strategies in the UK and EU.\u0000\u0000\u0000Originality/value\u0000The paper introduces different criteria to evaluate the impact of RoO that should be taken into consideration by negotiators. It emphasizes that RoO should be simple, predictable, coherent, IT compatible and easily adaptable.\u0000","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2019-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-11-2018-0053","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46880705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：