区域贸易协定如何处理技术性贸易壁垒条款争议?

A. Molina, V. Khoroshavina
{"title":"区域贸易协定如何处理技术性贸易壁垒条款争议?","authors":"A. Molina, V. Khoroshavina","doi":"10.30875/9700E22A-EN","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our analysis covers 260 RTAs, of which 200 include at least one provision on TBT. We find that in general disputes on TBT provisions arising under RTAs are not treated differently from other type of RTA disputes. Fifteen per cent of RTAs with TBT provisions include provisions that apply exclusively to the resolution of TBT disputes and do so in general to favour the WTO dispute settlement mechanism over that of the RTA; only in one RTA - NAFTA - do the parties provide under some conditions for the exclusive use of the RTA DSM for certain types of TBT disputes. In the remaining RTAs, the parties do not provide for a specific way of dealing with TBT disputes and apply instead the general dispute settlement (DS) provisions under the RTA. Under the general DS provisions, the parties do not give exclusivity to one forum, with one exception EU-Chile RTA, but allow instead for the selection of the forum in case of jurisdictional overlapping and in accordance with certain rules. RTAs with such a forum-choice clause account for 55% of the RTAs with TBT provisions, while 24% do not provide for any guidelines in the case of jurisdictional overlapping, which can be problematic, and 5% do not have their own dispute settlement mechanism (DSM), so that in the event of a dispute over the same (or similar) obligation under the RTA and the WTO, the WTO DSM would be the only possible forum.","PeriodicalId":178903,"journal":{"name":"WTO Working Papers","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Regional Trade Agreements Deal with Disputes Concerning their TBT Provisions?\",\"authors\":\"A. Molina, V. Khoroshavina\",\"doi\":\"10.30875/9700E22A-EN\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Our analysis covers 260 RTAs, of which 200 include at least one provision on TBT. We find that in general disputes on TBT provisions arising under RTAs are not treated differently from other type of RTA disputes. Fifteen per cent of RTAs with TBT provisions include provisions that apply exclusively to the resolution of TBT disputes and do so in general to favour the WTO dispute settlement mechanism over that of the RTA; only in one RTA - NAFTA - do the parties provide under some conditions for the exclusive use of the RTA DSM for certain types of TBT disputes. In the remaining RTAs, the parties do not provide for a specific way of dealing with TBT disputes and apply instead the general dispute settlement (DS) provisions under the RTA. Under the general DS provisions, the parties do not give exclusivity to one forum, with one exception EU-Chile RTA, but allow instead for the selection of the forum in case of jurisdictional overlapping and in accordance with certain rules. RTAs with such a forum-choice clause account for 55% of the RTAs with TBT provisions, while 24% do not provide for any guidelines in the case of jurisdictional overlapping, which can be problematic, and 5% do not have their own dispute settlement mechanism (DSM), so that in the event of a dispute over the same (or similar) obligation under the RTA and the WTO, the WTO DSM would be the only possible forum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WTO Working Papers\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WTO Working Papers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30875/9700E22A-EN\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WTO Working Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30875/9700E22A-EN","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的分析涵盖了260个区域贸易协定,其中200个至少包含一项关于技术性贸易壁垒的规定。我们发现,一般而言,在区域贸易协定下产生的关于技术性贸易壁垒条款的争端与其他类型的区域贸易协定争端并没有区别对待。15%有技术性贸易壁垒条款的区域贸易协定包括专门适用于解决技术性贸易壁垒争端的条款,而且这样做一般是为了有利于世贸组织争端解决机制,而不是区域贸易协定的争端解决机制;只有在一个区域贸易协定——北美自由贸易协定——中,各方在某些条件下规定专门使用区域贸易协定DSM来解决某些类型的技术性贸易壁垒争端。在其余的区域贸易协定中,各方没有规定处理技术性贸易壁垒争端的具体方式,而是采用区域贸易协定下的一般争端解决规定。根据一般DS条款,除欧盟-智利区域贸易协定外,当事各方不给予某一仲裁机构排他性,而是允许在管辖权重叠的情况下根据某些规则选择仲裁机构。在有技术性贸易壁垒条款的区域贸易协定中,有这样一个论坛选择条款的区域贸易协定占55%,而24%的区域贸易协定在管辖权重叠的情况下没有提供任何指导方针,这可能会产生问题,5%的区域贸易协定没有自己的争端解决机制(DSM),因此,如果在区域贸易协定和世贸组织下的相同(或类似)义务发生争端,世贸组织DSM将是唯一可能的论坛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How Regional Trade Agreements Deal with Disputes Concerning their TBT Provisions?
Our analysis covers 260 RTAs, of which 200 include at least one provision on TBT. We find that in general disputes on TBT provisions arising under RTAs are not treated differently from other type of RTA disputes. Fifteen per cent of RTAs with TBT provisions include provisions that apply exclusively to the resolution of TBT disputes and do so in general to favour the WTO dispute settlement mechanism over that of the RTA; only in one RTA - NAFTA - do the parties provide under some conditions for the exclusive use of the RTA DSM for certain types of TBT disputes. In the remaining RTAs, the parties do not provide for a specific way of dealing with TBT disputes and apply instead the general dispute settlement (DS) provisions under the RTA. Under the general DS provisions, the parties do not give exclusivity to one forum, with one exception EU-Chile RTA, but allow instead for the selection of the forum in case of jurisdictional overlapping and in accordance with certain rules. RTAs with such a forum-choice clause account for 55% of the RTAs with TBT provisions, while 24% do not provide for any guidelines in the case of jurisdictional overlapping, which can be problematic, and 5% do not have their own dispute settlement mechanism (DSM), so that in the event of a dispute over the same (or similar) obligation under the RTA and the WTO, the WTO DSM would be the only possible forum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Trade and Welfare Effects of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement How will global trade patterns evolve in the long run? A Novel Framework to Evaluate Changes in Access to and Costs of Trade Finance Trade policy implications of a changing world Means of Liberalization and Beyond
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1