{"title":"Narratives of Globalization and the Pitfalls of Neutrality: A Brief Critique of Six Faces of Globalization","authors":"Paolo Vargiu","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad018","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49264106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Journal Article What Role for the WTO in Disciplining China’s State-Dominated Economy? Get access Between Market Economy and State Capitalism: China’s State-Owned Enterprises and the World Trading System. By HENRY GAO and WEIHUAN ZHOU, Cambridge University Press, 2022. ISBN 9781108908795. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108908795 Jennifer Hillman Jennifer Hillman Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 26, Issue 3, September 2023, Pages 614–618, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad017 Published: 18 May 2023 Article history Editorial decision: 21 April 2023 Received: 21 April 2023 Accepted: 22 April 2023 Corrected and typeset: 18 May 2023 Published: 18 May 2023
WTO在约束中国国有主导经济中扮演什么角色?市场经济与国家资本主义之间的准入:中国国有企业与世界贸易体系。高享利、周卫焕著，剑桥大学出版社，2022年。ISBN 9781108908795。DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108908795 Jennifer Hillman Jennifer Hillman本文作者的其他作品搜索:牛津学术谷歌学者国际经济法杂志，第26卷，第3期，2023年9月，614-618页，https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad017出版:2023年5月18日文章历史编辑决定:2023年4月21日收到:2023年4月21日接受:2023年4月22日校正和排版:2023年5月18日出版:2023年5月18日
{"title":"What Role for the WTO in Disciplining China’s State-Dominated Economy?","authors":"Jennifer Hillman","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad017","url":null,"abstract":"Journal Article What Role for the WTO in Disciplining China’s State-Dominated Economy? Get access Between Market Economy and State Capitalism: China’s State-Owned Enterprises and the World Trading System. By HENRY GAO and WEIHUAN ZHOU, Cambridge University Press, 2022. ISBN 9781108908795. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108908795 Jennifer Hillman Jennifer Hillman Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 26, Issue 3, September 2023, Pages 614–618, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad017 Published: 18 May 2023 Article history Editorial decision: 21 April 2023 Received: 21 April 2023 Accepted: 22 April 2023 Corrected and typeset: 18 May 2023 Published: 18 May 2023","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135813090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article enquires into the extent to which the elusive Chapeau of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) may constrain the ability of regulating Members to tackle environmental externalities via unilateral regulatory action. It employs an analysis of recent European Union regulatory measures to assess the rationale of different ‘indicators’ of compliance with the Chapeau and unpack their implications. The article illustrates that a good faith–centred interpretation of the Chapeau criteria helps identify aspects in the practical application of a measure that may afford protection to domestic products or result in country-based discrimination. It also preserves the margins of action of regulating Members and can improve the regulatory design and environmental effectiveness of unilateral measures. An expansive interpretation of ‘situational’ discrimination and ‘coercion’, by contrast, captures significant distortions of competitive opportunities between ‘like’ products, broadening market access and stretching the Chapeau beyond a good faith–centred focus. Furthermore, this interpretative approach can indirectly impact the regulatory design of the measures and undermine their environmental effectiveness. Against this backdrop, the article argues that the dispute settlement organs should carefully delimit the scope of the Chapeau conditions and adhere to a good faith–centred interpretative approach.
{"title":"Anti-deforestation npr-PPMs and Carbon Border Measures: Thinking About the Chapeau of Article XX GATT in Times of Climate Crisis","authors":"Giulia Claudia Leonelli","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article enquires into the extent to which the elusive Chapeau of Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) may constrain the ability of regulating Members to tackle environmental externalities via unilateral regulatory action. It employs an analysis of recent European Union regulatory measures to assess the rationale of different ‘indicators’ of compliance with the Chapeau and unpack their implications. The article illustrates that a good faith–centred interpretation of the Chapeau criteria helps identify aspects in the practical application of a measure that may afford protection to domestic products or result in country-based discrimination. It also preserves the margins of action of regulating Members and can improve the regulatory design and environmental effectiveness of unilateral measures. An expansive interpretation of ‘situational’ discrimination and ‘coercion’, by contrast, captures significant distortions of competitive opportunities between ‘like’ products, broadening market access and stretching the Chapeau beyond a good faith–centred focus. Furthermore, this interpretative approach can indirectly impact the regulatory design of the measures and undermine their environmental effectiveness. Against this backdrop, the article argues that the dispute settlement organs should carefully delimit the scope of the Chapeau conditions and adhere to a good faith–centred interpretative approach.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48789133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The current non-compliance with United Nations (UN) and World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements protecting transnational public goods, military aggression among WTO members, violent suppression of human and democratic rights, global health pandemics, climate change, ocean pollution, overfishing, and other biodiversity losses reflects ‘governance failures’ (e.g. to limit ‘market failures’) and ‘constitutional failures’ (e.g. to protect human and democratic rights and the sustainable development goals). The geopolitical rivalries among totalitarian governments and democracies render constitutional UN and WTO reforms unlikely. They entail ‘regulatory competition’ (e.g. among neoliberalism, state capitalism, and ordo-liberal constitutionalism) and plurilateral responses aimed at limiting abuses of power (like collective countermeasures against Russia’s illegal wars and war crimes) and at protecting transnational public goods (like plurilateral ‘climate change mitigation clubs’, appeal arbitration among WTO members, regional human rights and security agreements). The power politics disrupting the UN and WTO legal systems is bound to promote regionalization of economic law, re-globalization of supply chains, and geopolitical rivalries resulting from conflicting value priorities and neglect for the human rights underlying the sustainable development goals.
{"title":"International Economic Law in the ‘Asian Century’","authors":"E. Petersmann","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The current non-compliance with United Nations (UN) and World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements protecting transnational public goods, military aggression among WTO members, violent suppression of human and democratic rights, global health pandemics, climate change, ocean pollution, overfishing, and other biodiversity losses reflects ‘governance failures’ (e.g. to limit ‘market failures’) and ‘constitutional failures’ (e.g. to protect human and democratic rights and the sustainable development goals). The geopolitical rivalries among totalitarian governments and democracies render constitutional UN and WTO reforms unlikely. They entail ‘regulatory competition’ (e.g. among neoliberalism, state capitalism, and ordo-liberal constitutionalism) and plurilateral responses aimed at limiting abuses of power (like collective countermeasures against Russia’s illegal wars and war crimes) and at protecting transnational public goods (like plurilateral ‘climate change mitigation clubs’, appeal arbitration among WTO members, regional human rights and security agreements). The power politics disrupting the UN and WTO legal systems is bound to promote regionalization of economic law, re-globalization of supply chains, and geopolitical rivalries resulting from conflicting value priorities and neglect for the human rights underlying the sustainable development goals.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43252974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The legality of trade with territories over which sovereignty is disputed has recently come to the forefront of policy and academic discussions due to emerging case law and escalating territorial conflicts. While considerations shaping the debate on economic activities with disputed territories are typically informed by concerns of international law, little is known about international trade and customs rules applicable to these regimes. This article aims to fill this literature gap by inquiring into the rules that apply to trade with disputed territories under the relevant World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements, in particular the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the Agreement on Rules of Origin, and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. In a broader sense, it contributes to the understanding of interactions between the WTO and other self-containing regimes of international law, illustrating the challenges that arise from their different approaches to territories.
{"title":"WTO Rules for Trade with Disputed Territories","authors":"Olia Kanevskaia","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The legality of trade with territories over which sovereignty is disputed has recently come to the forefront of policy and academic discussions due to emerging case law and escalating territorial conflicts. While considerations shaping the debate on economic activities with disputed territories are typically informed by concerns of international law, little is known about international trade and customs rules applicable to these regimes. This article aims to fill this literature gap by inquiring into the rules that apply to trade with disputed territories under the relevant World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreements, in particular the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the Agreement on Rules of Origin, and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. In a broader sense, it contributes to the understanding of interactions between the WTO and other self-containing regimes of international law, illustrating the challenges that arise from their different approaches to territories.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46264325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book Review","authors":"R. Anuradha","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47421584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to: From Bananas to Large Civil Aircraft: An On-Going Quest for Value-Added in the Computation of Countermeasures at the WTO","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad014","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43068741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article responds to the growing risk of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims arising from states’ measures to mitigate climate change, such as fossil fuel phase-outs. It proposes a carve-out that would cover measures that are adopted in good faith and have a reasonable causal nexus with reducing and stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. measures ‘related to’ this aim). Depending on states’ preferences, the carve-out could be designed as a treaty-wide exclusion from international investment agreements (IIAs) or as a carve-out that only removes such measures from ISDS procedures. Importantly, we propose a process to govern the application of the carve-out that prevents this issue being determined by ISDS tribunals. We argue that questions concerning the carve-out’s application to specific investor claims should initially be subject to joint determination by the treaty parties’ environmental authorities. Where these authorities cannot agree, we propose that this issue should be referred to a State–State tribunal that includes members with climate-related expertise. This article advances the specific debate about a climate carve-out for IIAs and wider debates about strategies for protecting regulatory space under IIAs through its detailed examination of carve-outs, drawing on examples from a range of subject areas.
{"title":"A Climate Change Carve-Out for Investment Treaties","authors":"Joshua Paine, Elizabeth Sheargold","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article responds to the growing risk of Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims arising from states’ measures to mitigate climate change, such as fossil fuel phase-outs. It proposes a carve-out that would cover measures that are adopted in good faith and have a reasonable causal nexus with reducing and stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. measures ‘related to’ this aim). Depending on states’ preferences, the carve-out could be designed as a treaty-wide exclusion from international investment agreements (IIAs) or as a carve-out that only removes such measures from ISDS procedures. Importantly, we propose a process to govern the application of the carve-out that prevents this issue being determined by ISDS tribunals. We argue that questions concerning the carve-out’s application to specific investor claims should initially be subject to joint determination by the treaty parties’ environmental authorities. Where these authorities cannot agree, we propose that this issue should be referred to a State–State tribunal that includes members with climate-related expertise. This article advances the specific debate about a climate carve-out for IIAs and wider debates about strategies for protecting regulatory space under IIAs through its detailed examination of carve-outs, drawing on examples from a range of subject areas.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48409502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the last few years, many states around the world have faced a series of shocks to their economies—from the seizing up of global supply chains to the weaponization of trade and finance—that have catapulted concerns about how to strike a balance between risk, reward, and resilience into the center of public discussions and policy-making. This Article provides a new Risk, Reward, and Resilience Framework, which synthesizes and integrates insights from diverse disciplines and domains. I set out the drivers of each element, how they are connected, and resulting policy choices. To illustrate its practical application, I apply Risk, Reward, and Resilience Framework to two case studies involving economic interdependence: the COVID-19 supply chain shock and China’s economic coercion of Australia. In doing so, I provide policymakers with a new mental model for thinking about and working through complex policy challenges.
{"title":"Risk, Reward, and Resilience Framework: Integrative Policy Making in a Complex World","authors":"Anthea Roberts","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the last few years, many states around the world have faced a series of shocks to their economies—from the seizing up of global supply chains to the weaponization of trade and finance—that have catapulted concerns about how to strike a balance between risk, reward, and resilience into the center of public discussions and policy-making. This Article provides a new Risk, Reward, and Resilience Framework, which synthesizes and integrates insights from diverse disciplines and domains. I set out the drivers of each element, how they are connected, and resulting policy choices. To illustrate its practical application, I apply Risk, Reward, and Resilience Framework to two case studies involving economic interdependence: the COVID-19 supply chain shock and China’s economic coercion of Australia. In doing so, I provide policymakers with a new mental model for thinking about and working through complex policy challenges.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43238704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bernard M Hoekman, Petros C Mavroidis, Sunayana Sasmal
ABSTRACT By prohibiting subsidies that support illegal, unregulated, or unreported fishing activities and contribute to the unsustainable depletion of marine resources, the 2022 Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS) is the first World Trade Organization (WTO) treaty to recognize that a specific trade policy instrument can have adverse consequences for the global commons. We assess the AFS as such and through the lens of the broader challenge confronting WTO members in determining how to address subsidy spillovers and adapt trade policy rules to protect the global commons. While the AFS is a step forward for the WTO, definitions of what constitutes a subsidy and the approach taken to ensure transparency are those that have been part of the WTO since 1995 and have become the cause for contestation and calls for reform. We suggest ways in which birth defects can be addressed while implementing and expanding the coverage of the agreement.
{"title":"Managing Externalities in the WTO: The Agreement On Fisheries Subsidies","authors":"Bernard M Hoekman, Petros C Mavroidis, Sunayana Sasmal","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad008","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT By prohibiting subsidies that support illegal, unregulated, or unreported fishing activities and contribute to the unsustainable depletion of marine resources, the 2022 Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS) is the first World Trade Organization (WTO) treaty to recognize that a specific trade policy instrument can have adverse consequences for the global commons. We assess the AFS as such and through the lens of the broader challenge confronting WTO members in determining how to address subsidy spillovers and adapt trade policy rules to protect the global commons. While the AFS is a step forward for the WTO, definitions of what constitutes a subsidy and the approach taken to ensure transparency are those that have been part of the WTO since 1995 and have become the cause for contestation and calls for reform. We suggest ways in which birth defects can be addressed while implementing and expanding the coverage of the agreement.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135080361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：