The European Union (EU) can only act internationally on competences that have been transferred to it by its Member States. Trade agreements negotiated by the EU that include provisions outside its exclusive competences should be concluded as ‘mixed’. Mixed trade agreements must be ratified following not only the procedures set out in the EU treaties, but also the national ratification procedures of the Member States. As a result, national or even regional parliaments may block trade deals agreed between the EU and its trading partners after years of negotiations. Should the EU then avoid negotiating mixed trade agreements? We argue that the answer to this question depends crucially on the objectives of the EU when negotiating with its trading partners. If the EU is mostly driven by market-access motives, it should restrict the agreement to policy areas under its exclusive competence, thus insulating the trade deal from the legal and political risks of mixity. When instead its motives are mostly political, mixity is a ‘necessary evil’ to achieve non-trade objectives. Trade Agreements, European Unity, Competences, Ratification Procedures
{"title":"EU Trade Agreements: To Mix or Not to Mix, That Is the Question","authors":"Laura Puccio, P. Conconi, Cristina Herghelegiu","doi":"10.54648/trad2021009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021009","url":null,"abstract":"The European Union (EU) can only act internationally on competences that have been transferred to it by its Member States. Trade agreements negotiated by the EU that include provisions outside its exclusive competences should be concluded as ‘mixed’. Mixed trade agreements must be ratified following not only the procedures set out in the EU treaties, but also the national ratification procedures of the Member States. As a result, national or even regional parliaments may block trade deals agreed between the EU and its trading partners after years of negotiations. Should the EU then avoid negotiating mixed trade agreements? We argue that the answer to this question depends crucially on the objectives of the EU when negotiating with its trading partners. If the EU is mostly driven by market-access motives, it should restrict the agreement to policy areas under its exclusive competence, thus insulating the trade deal from the legal and political risks of mixity. When instead its motives are mostly political, mixity is a ‘necessary evil’ to achieve non-trade objectives.\u0000Trade Agreements, European Unity, Competences, Ratification Procedures","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42488950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
How should products produced in occupied territories be labelled for export? In recent years, Courts in the UK and Canada addressed this technical yet politically-charged question, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. More recently, the Court of Justice of the EU was asked to determine the mandatory requirements under EU consumer law of indication of origin of products produced in settlements situated in territories occupied by the State of Israel, namely the Golan Heights, theWest Bank and East Jerusalem. In Organisation juive européenne the Court of Justice established that although EU consumer law refers to the need to supply information regarding the country of origin or the place of provenance, those provisions should be interpreted as requiring that foodstuffs originating in an occupied territory must bear not only the indication of that territory but also the indication of that provenance (i.e. indication that it comes from an ‘Israeli settlement’). In imposing broad labelling requirements, the Court heavily relied on both the notion of ‘ethical considerations’ under EU consumer law and on international law, boldly addressing some of the contentious legal and political issues at stake. In adopting this approach, the Court contributed to the harmonious reading of EU consumer law and public international law. Yet its heavy reliance on public international law should be contrasted with its failure to rely on international trade law, a neglect that contributed to selective and discriminatory treatment of Israeli settlement products. Moreover, in imposing broad labelling requirements, the Court shifted its focus from the EU and its Member States to the ultimate EU consumers, thereby advancing the private enforcement of international law in lieu of public enforcement. settlement products; interface between public international law and international trade law, EU-Israel relations
{"title":"Labelling Settlement Products: When EU Consumer Law Meets Public International Law (But Ignores International Trade Law)","authors":"G. Harpaz","doi":"10.54648/trad2021014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021014","url":null,"abstract":"How should products produced in occupied territories be labelled for export? In recent years, Courts in the UK and Canada addressed this technical yet politically-charged question, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. More recently, the Court of Justice of the EU was asked to determine the mandatory requirements under EU consumer law of indication of origin of products produced in settlements situated in territories occupied by the State of Israel, namely the Golan Heights, theWest Bank and East Jerusalem. In Organisation juive européenne the Court of Justice established that although EU consumer law refers to the need to supply information regarding the country of origin or the place of provenance, those provisions should be interpreted as requiring that foodstuffs originating in an occupied territory must bear not only the indication of that territory but also the indication of that provenance (i.e. indication that it comes from an ‘Israeli settlement’). In imposing broad labelling requirements, the Court heavily relied on both the notion of ‘ethical considerations’ under EU consumer law and on international law, boldly addressing some of the contentious legal and political issues at stake. In adopting this approach, the Court contributed to the harmonious reading of EU consumer law and public international law. Yet its heavy reliance on public international law should be contrasted with its failure to rely on international trade law, a neglect that contributed to selective and discriminatory treatment of Israeli settlement products. Moreover, in imposing broad labelling requirements, the Court shifted its focus from the EU and its Member States to the ultimate EU consumers, thereby advancing the private enforcement of international law in lieu of public enforcement.\u0000settlement products; interface between public international law and international trade law, EU-Israel relations","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42723052","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The ‘Walker Paper’ represents a commendable effort to find middle-ground on the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body, but does not address the US concerns about the Appellate Body’s overreaching in antidumping, countervailing duty, and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Article XIX ‘escape clause’ disputes, and instead seizes on a series of half-hearted fixes to the long list of concerns in US Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) ‘Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization’. US concerns about overreaching date back to the Bush 43 and Obama Administrations and are rooted in the Appellate Body’s ‘zeroing’ line of cases. The concerns rest on the conviction of US trade officials who participated in the Uruguay Round negotiations and later served in the Bush 43, Obama, and Trump Administrations, that there was never a WTO agreement to abolish ‘zeroing’. This view was shared by the WTO Secretariat and WTO Panels and underpinned the contentious, decade-long impasse between USTR, the WTO Secretariat, and WTO Panels on the one hand, and the Appellate Body and Appellate Body Secretariat on the other. While the Appellate Body’s overreaching has multiple sources, one is its dismissive approach to negotiating history under Article 32 of the Vienna Convention, and obsessive reliance on the Oxford English Dictionary as a main source of meaning in interpreting the WTO Agreements. Had the Appellate Body taken a more respectful look at the Uruguay Round negotiating history, it would have found no support for efforts to read a broad prohibition on zeroing into terms that dated back to the Kennedy Round Antidumping Agreement, Tokyo Round Antidumping Code, and GATT 1947. The Appellate Body’s overreaching also appears to stem from hubris, as some Appellate Body Members have sought to make their mark on international jurisprudence or serve as saviours of the WTO system. While some in Geneva are clearly hoping the US concerns will disappear once the Biden Administration takes office, these concerns predated Ambassador Lighthizer by over a decade and are shared by both Republicans and Democratic Members of Congress. Accordingly, even if the new Administration were to seize on some variant of the Walker paper as an excuse to placate US allies and trading partners, it’s unlikely to offer a lasting solution, since the same problems will likely recur without serious systemic and structural reforms. World Trade Organization, WTO, Appellate Body, Dispute Settlement Understanding, Dispute Settlement, Antidumping Agreement, Zeroing
“沃克文件”代表了在世界贸易组织(WTO)上诉机构中寻找中间立场的值得赞扬的努力，但没有解决美国对上诉机构在反倾销、反补贴税和关税与贸易总协定(GATT)第19条“逃避条款”争端中越权的担忧。而是针对美国贸易代表办公室(USTR)的《世界贸易组织上诉机构报告》(Report on Appellate of the World Trade Organization)中的一长串关切问题，采取了一系列半心半意的补救措施。美国对越权的担忧可以追溯到布什政府和奥巴马政府，其根源在于上诉机构对案件的“归零”路线。这些担忧源于参与乌拉圭回合谈判并后来在布什、奥巴马和特朗普政府任职的美国贸易官员的信念，即WTO从未达成过废除“归零”的协议。这一观点得到了世贸组织秘书处和专家组的认同，并成为美国贸易代表办公室、世贸组织秘书处和专家组与上诉机构和上诉机构秘书处之间长达十年的争议僵局的基础。上诉机构的越权行为有多个原因，其中一个原因是它对根据《维也纳公约》第32条谈判历史的不屑一顾，以及在解释《WTO协定》时过分依赖《牛津英语词典》作为主要的含义来源。如果上诉机构对乌拉圭回合谈判的历史持更尊重的态度，它就会发现，没有人支持将肯尼迪回合反倾销协定、东京回合反倾销法典和关贸总协定1947年的条款广泛禁止归零。上诉机构的越权似乎也源于傲慢，因为一些上诉机构成员试图在国际法理学上留下自己的印记，或成为世贸组织体系的救世主。虽然日内瓦的一些人显然希望，一旦拜登政府上任，美国的担忧就会消失，但这些担忧早在莱特希泽大使上任十多年前就存在了，国会的共和党和民主党议员也有同样的担忧。因此，即使新政府抓住沃克文件的某些变体作为安抚美国盟友和贸易伙伴的借口，也不太可能提供持久的解决方案，因为如果没有认真的系统和结构改革，同样的问题很可能会再次出现。世界贸易组织，WTO，上诉机构，争端解决谅解，争端解决，反倾销协定，归零
{"title":"Can the Appellate Body Be Saved?","authors":"W. Maruyama","doi":"10.54648/trad2021008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021008","url":null,"abstract":"The ‘Walker Paper’ represents a commendable effort to find middle-ground on the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body, but does not address the US concerns about the Appellate Body’s overreaching in antidumping, countervailing duty, and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Article XIX ‘escape clause’ disputes, and instead seizes on a series of half-hearted fixes to the long list of concerns in US Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) ‘Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization’. US concerns about overreaching date back to the Bush 43 and Obama Administrations and are rooted in the Appellate Body’s ‘zeroing’ line of cases. The concerns rest on the conviction of US trade officials who participated in the Uruguay Round negotiations and later served in the Bush 43, Obama, and Trump Administrations, that there was never a WTO agreement to abolish ‘zeroing’. This view was shared by the WTO Secretariat and WTO Panels and underpinned the contentious, decade-long impasse between USTR, the WTO Secretariat, and WTO Panels on the one hand, and the Appellate Body and Appellate Body Secretariat on the other. While the Appellate Body’s overreaching has multiple sources, one is its dismissive approach to negotiating history under Article 32 of the Vienna Convention, and obsessive reliance on the Oxford English Dictionary as a main source of meaning in interpreting the WTO Agreements. Had the Appellate Body taken a more respectful look at the Uruguay Round negotiating history, it would have found no support for efforts to read a broad prohibition on zeroing into terms that dated back to the Kennedy Round Antidumping Agreement, Tokyo Round Antidumping Code, and GATT 1947. The Appellate Body’s overreaching also appears to stem from hubris, as some Appellate Body Members have sought to make their mark on international jurisprudence or serve as saviours of the WTO system. While some in Geneva are clearly hoping the US concerns will disappear once the Biden Administration takes office, these concerns predated Ambassador Lighthizer by over a decade and are shared by both Republicans and Democratic Members of Congress. Accordingly, even if the new Administration were to seize on some variant of the Walker paper as an excuse to placate US allies and trading partners, it’s unlikely to offer a lasting solution, since the same problems will likely recur without serious systemic and structural reforms.\u0000World Trade Organization, WTO, Appellate Body, Dispute Settlement Understanding, Dispute Settlement, Antidumping Agreement, Zeroing","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48270872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article attempts to understand the profound political-economic, geographic, and historical force behind the Trump trade policy ‘revolution’ from the perspective of world-systems analysis. The trade war launched by the United States against China is essentially motivated by a profound political-economic and geographic logic: the US and China are competing to ‘capture’ core processes in the world-economy. The real imminent challenge facing the US-China relations and the rest of the world is actually not the so-called ‘Thucydides Trap’ (China challenges American global power), or ‘the Kindleberger Trap’ (America gives up global economic leadership while China is not ready to take over American role). The underlying economic driver of the trade war is the emergence of new core processes in the capitalist world-economy and the attempts by governments to ‘capture’ those processes within cities within their country. As the paired Kondratieff cycle and hegemonic cycle model tells us, economic depression accelerates hegemonic decline, and ushers in a period of restructuring and transition. Therefore, our forecast is that the US-China ‘trade war’ will not stop, and will be an ongoing component of the restructuring of the global geopolitical order in the coming years. trade war, US-China relations, ‘Thucydides Trap’, ‘Kindleberger Trap’, Political- Geography Capture, core processes, Capitalist World-Economy, Kondratieff Cycle, hegemonic cycle, global geopolitical order
{"title":"Why and Whither the US-China Trade War?: Not Realist ‘Traps’ but Political Geography ‘Capture’ as Explanation","authors":"Xiaotong Zhang, C. Flint","doi":"10.54648/trad2021013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021013","url":null,"abstract":"This article attempts to understand the profound political-economic, geographic, and historical force behind the Trump trade policy ‘revolution’ from the perspective of world-systems analysis. The trade war launched by the United States against China is essentially motivated by a profound political-economic and geographic logic: the US and China are competing to ‘capture’ core processes in the world-economy. The real imminent challenge facing the US-China relations and the rest of the world is actually not the so-called ‘Thucydides Trap’ (China challenges American global power), or ‘the Kindleberger Trap’ (America gives up global economic leadership while China is not ready to take over American role). The underlying economic driver of the trade war is the emergence of new core processes in the capitalist world-economy and the attempts by governments to ‘capture’ those processes within cities within their country. As the paired Kondratieff cycle and hegemonic cycle model tells us, economic depression accelerates hegemonic decline, and ushers in a period of restructuring and transition. Therefore, our forecast is that the US-China ‘trade war’ will not stop, and will be an ongoing component of the restructuring of the global geopolitical order in the coming years.\u0000trade war, US-China relations, ‘Thucydides Trap’, ‘Kindleberger Trap’, Political- Geography Capture, core processes, Capitalist World-Economy, Kondratieff Cycle, hegemonic cycle, global geopolitical order","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46486676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The efficacy of the World Trade Organization (WTO), as an international forum seeking to provide a uniform platform to Member States for bilateral and multilateral negotiations and further the spirit of a new international economic legal order, is challenged constantly. This article explains how China is using the WTO accession process to leverage its domestic interests towards the Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) to obtain greater commitments from existing and potential BRI nations. It is shown that after the BRI’s official establishment in 2013, China’s trade commitments from potential accession countries are becoming more pronounced, with increasing and sometimes onerous expectations of the acceding countries, due to the lack of any standard format for bilateral accession protocols. WTO law is increasingly part of BRI hard law governance practices, suggesting encroachment of BRI disputes within the WTO dispute settlement framework to establish a novel approach to dispute resolution. Since rules-based trade practices are needed, Member States should not adopt accession protocols that are either too rigid or too flexible, thereby creating glaring loopholes to be misused. WTO’s overall objective of furthering trade liberalization can be achieved only by keeping track of techniques adopted by developed countries when negotiating with developing and least developed countries such that potential members are not discouraged from joining the new economic order from the outset. BRI, Belt and Road Initiative, WTO, accession, SCM agreement, subsidies, services, telecommunications, trade-related investment measures, LDC Guidelines
{"title":"One Stone, Two Birds: Can China Leverage WTO Accession to Build the BRI?","authors":"J. Chaisse, Jamieson Kirkwood","doi":"10.54648/trad2021011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021011","url":null,"abstract":"The efficacy of the World Trade Organization (WTO), as an international forum seeking to provide a uniform platform to Member States for bilateral and multilateral negotiations and further the spirit of a new international economic legal order, is challenged constantly. This article explains how China is using the WTO accession process to leverage its domestic interests towards the Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) to obtain greater commitments from existing and potential BRI nations. It is shown that after the BRI’s official establishment in 2013, China’s trade commitments from potential accession countries are becoming more pronounced, with increasing and sometimes onerous expectations of the acceding countries, due to the lack of any standard format for bilateral accession protocols. WTO law is increasingly part of BRI hard law governance practices, suggesting encroachment of BRI disputes within the WTO dispute settlement framework to establish a novel approach to dispute resolution. Since rules-based trade practices are needed, Member States should not adopt accession protocols that are either too rigid or too flexible, thereby creating glaring loopholes to be misused. WTO’s overall objective of furthering trade liberalization can be achieved only by keeping track of techniques adopted by developed countries when negotiating with developing and least developed countries such that potential members are not discouraged from joining the new economic order from the outset.\u0000BRI, Belt and Road Initiative, WTO, accession, SCM agreement, subsidies, services, telecommunications, trade-related investment measures, LDC Guidelines","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43248998","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Few issues have challenged tax policymakers and commentators as much as digital taxation has in recent years. Ongoing efforts to reconstruct the rules of international tax to ‘properly’ govern the taxation of the global digital economy have evoked some important tax and trade related considerations. As regards the latter, unilateral attempts by various states – partly spurred on by a lack of multilateral consensus – to tax nonresident digitalized businesses threaten to disrupt international trade relations, with threats of trade war exchanged between some World Trade Organization (WTO) Member States over the propriety of the proposed tax measures. As the conversation on the underlying tax issues progresses, this article examines the consistency of some features of the various unilateral digital tax measures with the fundamental WTO principle of non-discrimination, as contained in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Using the French Digital Service Tax (French DST) as a focal point, the article argues that there is a case to be made that some common features of the unilateral digital tax measures violate either the most favoured nation or national treatment rules of WTO non-discrimination. International Tax, International Trade, Digitalization, E-Commerce, WTO, Non-discrimination, Most Favoured Nation, National Treatment
{"title":"Testing for Consistency: Certain Digital Tax Measures and WTO Non-Discrimination","authors":"Okanga Ogbu Okanga","doi":"10.54648/trad2021004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021004","url":null,"abstract":"Few issues have challenged tax policymakers and commentators as much as digital taxation has in recent years. Ongoing efforts to reconstruct the rules of international tax to ‘properly’ govern the taxation of the global digital economy have evoked some important tax and trade related considerations. As regards the latter, unilateral attempts by various states – partly spurred on by a lack of multilateral consensus – to tax nonresident digitalized businesses threaten to disrupt international trade relations, with threats of trade war exchanged between some World Trade Organization (WTO) Member States over the propriety of the proposed tax measures. As the conversation on the underlying tax issues progresses, this article examines the consistency of some features of the various unilateral digital tax measures with the fundamental WTO principle of non-discrimination, as contained in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Using the French Digital Service Tax (French DST) as a focal point, the article argues that there is a case to be made that some common features of the unilateral digital tax measures violate either the most favoured nation or national treatment rules of WTO non-discrimination.\u0000International Tax, International Trade, Digitalization, E-Commerce, WTO, Non-discrimination, Most Favoured Nation, National Treatment","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41921633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of electronic government procurement systems has grown in recent years. Policy makers are increasingly employing e-government procurement tools to generate competition, increase transparency, streamline procuring processes and cut red tape to improve governance. This article examines the rationale for e-government procurement provisions in bilateral trade agreements and highlights the benefits from using electronic systems. Using the case of the EU-Vietnam trade agreement we elaborate on how electronic government procurement can be a mechanism to enhance transparency and accountability, and reduce opportunities for corruption in Vietnam. e-procurement, transparency, free trade agreements
{"title":"Electronic Government Procurement in the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement: An Opportunity for Increased Transparency and Accountability?","authors":"W. Kerr, S. Khorana","doi":"10.54648/trad2021005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021005","url":null,"abstract":"The use of electronic government procurement systems has grown in recent years. Policy makers are increasingly employing e-government procurement tools to generate competition, increase transparency, streamline procuring processes and cut red tape to improve governance. This article examines the rationale for e-government procurement provisions in bilateral trade agreements and highlights the benefits from using electronic systems. Using the case of the EU-Vietnam trade agreement we elaborate on how electronic government procurement can be a mechanism to enhance transparency and accountability, and reduce opportunities for corruption in Vietnam.\u0000e-procurement, transparency, free trade agreements","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49247562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article explores linkages between migration, international trade and investment from both economics and legal perspectives. The literature review reveals that the migration-investmenttrade triangle shows complex interdependencies, both in terms of substitution and complementarities, though its components remain largely separated both institutionally and legally. The 2018 Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration addresses a number of trade and investment-related issues. Recent treaty developments also encourage considering the three in a more integrated manner. The article suggests undertaking such an integration effort under the emerging principle of Common Concern of Humankind and sets out a number of preliminary ideas suggesting ways in which migration could be addressed in policies on international trade regulation and in the field of investment protection. Migration, trade, investment, Global Compact, Common Concern of Humankind
{"title":"Migration, Trade and Investment: Towards a New Common Concern of Humankind","authors":"T. Cottier, A. Shingal","doi":"10.54648/trad2021002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021002","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores linkages between migration, international trade and investment from both economics and legal perspectives. The literature review reveals that the migration-investmenttrade triangle shows complex interdependencies, both in terms of substitution and complementarities, though its components remain largely separated both institutionally and legally. The 2018 Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration addresses a number of trade and investment-related issues. Recent treaty developments also encourage considering the three in a more integrated manner. The article suggests undertaking such an integration effort under the emerging principle of Common Concern of Humankind and sets out a number of preliminary ideas suggesting ways in which migration could be addressed in policies on international trade regulation and in the field of investment protection.\u0000Migration, trade, investment, Global Compact, Common Concern of Humankind","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45827217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) faces what may be an existential crisis and considers options for structural reform, a fundamental issue it needs to examine is maintaining its relevance for the business community. Recognizing that businesses are a key stakeholder in the system of global trade, one aspect of ensuring this relevance is continued and improved engagement with the business community. This article explores and recommends one possibility for such engagement: utilization of the World Economic Forum (‘WEF’). The WEF prides itself on thorough stakeholder engagement, and arguably provides a more holistic representation of business community views. Although limitations to this notion are considered in the article, it is ultimately argued that the WTO should consult the WEF more regularly regarding matters of international trade regulation policy. In doing so, the WTO would be taking advantage of the WEF’s expertise, its existing investment into research and collaboration with major corporations, academics and government officials, as well as its unique structure that allows it to consider upcoming issues in an agile and adaptable manner. After considering stakeholder engagement structures in other fora, this article recommends an institutionalized mechanism to ensure repeated, systematic collaboration and accountability between the WTO and the WEF. World Trade Organization, WTO, World Economic Forum, WEF, business community, stakeholder engagement, institutional change, collaboration, reform
{"title":"Can the WEF Re-Connect the WTO to the Global Business Community?","authors":"Nadja Al Kanawati, Nish Perera","doi":"10.54648/trad2021006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021006","url":null,"abstract":"As the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) faces what may be an existential crisis and considers options for structural reform, a fundamental issue it needs to examine is maintaining its relevance for the business community. Recognizing that businesses are a key stakeholder in the system of global trade, one aspect of ensuring this relevance is continued and improved engagement with the business community. This article explores and recommends one possibility for such engagement: utilization of the World Economic Forum (‘WEF’).\u0000The WEF prides itself on thorough stakeholder engagement, and arguably provides a more holistic representation of business community views. Although limitations to this notion are considered in the article, it is ultimately argued that the WTO should consult the WEF more regularly regarding matters of international trade regulation policy. In doing so, the WTO would be taking advantage of the WEF’s expertise, its existing investment into research and collaboration with major corporations, academics and government officials, as well as its unique structure that allows it to consider upcoming issues in an agile and adaptable manner. After considering stakeholder engagement structures in other fora, this article recommends an institutionalized mechanism to ensure repeated, systematic collaboration and accountability between the WTO and the WEF.\u0000World Trade Organization, WTO, World Economic Forum, WEF, business community, stakeholder engagement, institutional change, collaboration, reform","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43610824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although China has consolidated the aim of reforming its society towards the rule of law, the Chinese version of the rule of law differs significantly from its counterparts in the Western tradition. Increasing attention is being paid to the peculiarities of the Chinese conception as China strives to expand its influence through launching the ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative (BRI). This article focuses on the question of whether and by what means various BRI projects are impacted by and impact upon the Chinese conception of the rule of law. The uniqueness of the Chinese approach can be examined from three dimensions: the ontological dimension, describing the preference for integration over convergence in the governance models of economies; the epistemological dimension, in which a posteriori justifications prevail over a priori ones; and the methodological dimension, in which the coordination between the public and the private spheres overshadows the confrontation between them. Following this, the paper profiles the practices of BRI investment and assesses whether these practices present consistently with the Chinese conception. Finally, this article examined the strong needs often embedded within BRI projects that call for sustainable cooperation, market-generating governmental intervention, as well as the coordination of various social interests. All these factors are consistent with the peculiarity of the Chinese conception of the rule of law. The paper argues that the BRI is highly consistent with the Chinese conception of the rule of law and may help further enhance it. This conclusion further suggests that the distinctive conception is not solely the result of ideological or political factors but also of the unique demands of certain types of economic undertakings. World Trade Organization, WTO, World Economic Forum, WEF, business community, stakeholder engagement, institutional change, collaboration, reform (OFDI), state-owned enterprises (SOEs), state-directed economies
{"title":"The Chinese Conception of the Rule of Law and Its Embodiment Under the ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative (BRI)","authors":"Luyao Che","doi":"10.54648/trad2021007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021007","url":null,"abstract":"Although China has consolidated the aim of reforming its society towards the rule of law, the Chinese version of the rule of law differs significantly from its counterparts in the Western tradition. Increasing attention is being paid to the peculiarities of the Chinese conception as China strives to expand its influence through launching the ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative (BRI). This article focuses on the question of whether and by what means various BRI projects are impacted by and impact upon the Chinese conception of the rule of law. The uniqueness of the Chinese approach can be examined from three dimensions: the ontological dimension, describing the preference for integration over convergence in the governance models of economies; the epistemological dimension, in which a posteriori justifications prevail over a priori ones; and the methodological dimension, in which the coordination between the public and the private spheres overshadows the confrontation between them. Following this, the paper profiles the practices of BRI investment and assesses whether these practices present consistently with the Chinese conception. Finally, this article examined the strong needs often embedded within BRI projects that call for sustainable cooperation, market-generating governmental intervention, as well as the coordination of various social interests. All these factors are consistent with the peculiarity of the Chinese conception of the rule of law. The paper argues that the BRI is highly consistent with the Chinese conception of the rule of law and may help further enhance it. This conclusion further suggests that the distinctive conception is not solely the result of ideological or political factors but also of the unique demands of certain types of economic undertakings.\u0000World Trade Organization, WTO, World Economic Forum, WEF, business community, stakeholder engagement, institutional change, collaboration, reform (OFDI), state-owned enterprises (SOEs), state-directed economies","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42050483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：