贸易争端中与经济证据相关的沟通和解释挑战

Marios C Iacovides, M. Jansen
{"title":"贸易争端中与经济证据相关的沟通和解释挑战","authors":"Marios C Iacovides, M. Jansen","doi":"10.1017/9781316534922.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent years have witnessed numerous instances in which economic evidence has been submitted to adjudicators in the context of WTO disputes. As it turns out, adjudicators have used this evidence only hesitantly as a basis for their decisions. In this paper we argue that a number of communication and interpretation challenges arising from the use of quantitative economic evidence can explain this phenomenon. In particular, we argue that it is in the current context difficult for adjudicators to assess the reliability and (un)biasedness of such evidence. Guidelines on how to assess quantitative evidence and benchmarks against which to evaluate the quality of such evidence may represent a useful if not necessary step in order to raise the acceptance of the use of quantitative evidence in trade disputes.","PeriodicalId":228651,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communication and Interpretation Challenges Related to Economic Evidence in Trade Disputes\",\"authors\":\"Marios C Iacovides, M. Jansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/9781316534922.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent years have witnessed numerous instances in which economic evidence has been submitted to adjudicators in the context of WTO disputes. As it turns out, adjudicators have used this evidence only hesitantly as a basis for their decisions. In this paper we argue that a number of communication and interpretation challenges arising from the use of quantitative economic evidence can explain this phenomenon. In particular, we argue that it is in the current context difficult for adjudicators to assess the reliability and (un)biasedness of such evidence. Guidelines on how to assess quantitative evidence and benchmarks against which to evaluate the quality of such evidence may represent a useful if not necessary step in order to raise the acceptance of the use of quantitative evidence in trade disputes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":228651,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316534922.009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316534922.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

近年来,在世贸组织争端的背景下,有许多经济证据被提交给裁决机构的案例。事实证明,法官们只是犹豫不决地将这一证据作为他们做出决定的基础。在本文中,我们认为,由于使用定量经济证据而产生的一些沟通和解释挑战可以解释这一现象。特别是,我们认为,在目前的情况下,审查员很难评估这些证据的可靠性和(无)偏见。关于如何评估定量证据的准则和用以评估此类证据质量的基准可能是一个有用的步骤,即使不是必要的步骤,以提高对在贸易争端中使用定量证据的接受程度。
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
Communication and Interpretation Challenges Related to Economic Evidence in Trade Disputes
Recent years have witnessed numerous instances in which economic evidence has been submitted to adjudicators in the context of WTO disputes. As it turns out, adjudicators have used this evidence only hesitantly as a basis for their decisions. In this paper we argue that a number of communication and interpretation challenges arising from the use of quantitative economic evidence can explain this phenomenon. In particular, we argue that it is in the current context difficult for adjudicators to assess the reliability and (un)biasedness of such evidence. Guidelines on how to assess quantitative evidence and benchmarks against which to evaluate the quality of such evidence may represent a useful if not necessary step in order to raise the acceptance of the use of quantitative evidence in trade disputes.
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
Dying Declarations: A Comparative Analysis of Admissibility and Evidentiary Value Probability, Presumptions and Evidentiary Burdens in Antitrust Analysis: Revitalizing the Rule of Reason for Exclusionary Conduct The Development of Payment Systems in Tanzania: A Discussion on the Laws Governing Electronic Cheque Tanzania Court-Appointed Experts and Accuracy in Adversarial Litigation Presumption of Negligence
×
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