贸易安全措施的最佳做法

IF 2.6 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW Journal of International Economic Law Pub Date : 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1093/jiel/jgad046
Harlan Grant Cohen
{"title":"贸易安全措施的最佳做法","authors":"Harlan Grant Cohen","doi":"10.1093/jiel/jgad046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global economy is increasingly being weaponized. Citing security concerns from traditional defence to economic competitiveness, health emergency, and climate crisis, states are turning to sanctions, tariffs, export controls, investment screening, and subsidies. But while economic statecraft is becoming common, rules remain scarce. Questions about notice, duration, proportionality, harm minimization, compensation, retaliation, and/or rebalancing lack clear answers and seem almost theoretical. Once, we might have hoped the World Trade Organization (WTO) would play a role in developing such rules. But in the absence of an Appellate Body and in the face of state rejections of review, WTO’s deliberative processes have ground to a halt. This essay argues for a new approach, focused less on adjudicating security disputes than on developing best practices for invoking and using trade security measures. It explains why a new approach is necessary, detailing both how the WTO’s deliberative engine broke down and why dispute settlement is ill-suited to develop guidance now needed. It suggests where and how best practices might be developed, before considering an agenda for such a best practice process. In the end, the hope is a process that can develop expectations—expectations that might make a world of economic statecraft a bit less dangerous.","PeriodicalId":46864,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Economic Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward best practices for trade-security measures\",\"authors\":\"Harlan Grant Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jiel/jgad046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The global economy is increasingly being weaponized. Citing security concerns from traditional defence to economic competitiveness, health emergency, and climate crisis, states are turning to sanctions, tariffs, export controls, investment screening, and subsidies. But while economic statecraft is becoming common, rules remain scarce. Questions about notice, duration, proportionality, harm minimization, compensation, retaliation, and/or rebalancing lack clear answers and seem almost theoretical. Once, we might have hoped the World Trade Organization (WTO) would play a role in developing such rules. But in the absence of an Appellate Body and in the face of state rejections of review, WTO’s deliberative processes have ground to a halt. This essay argues for a new approach, focused less on adjudicating security disputes than on developing best practices for invoking and using trade security measures. It explains why a new approach is necessary, detailing both how the WTO’s deliberative engine broke down and why dispute settlement is ill-suited to develop guidance now needed. It suggests where and how best practices might be developed, before considering an agenda for such a best practice process. In the end, the hope is a process that can develop expectations—expectations that might make a world of economic statecraft a bit less dangerous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46864,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Economic Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Economic Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad046\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Economic Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgad046","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球经济正日益被武器化。从传统防务到经济竞争力、卫生紧急状况和气候危机等安全问题,各国都在诉诸制裁、关税、出口管制、投资筛选和补贴等手段。但是,虽然经济国家手段越来越普遍,但规则却依然匮乏。关于通知、期限、相称性、伤害最小化、补偿、报复和/或再平衡等问题缺乏明确的答案,似乎近乎理论。曾经,我们可能希望世界贸易组织(WTO)能在制定此类规则方面发挥作用。但是,由于没有上诉机构,面对各国对审查的拒绝,世贸组织的审议进程已经停滞不前。本文主张采取一种新的方法,其重点不是裁决安全争端,而是制定援引和使用贸易安全措施的最佳做法。文章解释了为什么需要一种新方法,详细说明了世贸组织的审议引擎是如何崩溃的,以及为什么争端解决不适合制定现在所需的指导。在考虑最佳实践进程的议程之前,本报告提出了可以在哪里以及如何制定最佳实践的建议。归根结底,我们希望有一个能够形成期望的过程--这种期望可能会让世界的经济外交变得不那么危险。
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
Toward best practices for trade-security measures
The global economy is increasingly being weaponized. Citing security concerns from traditional defence to economic competitiveness, health emergency, and climate crisis, states are turning to sanctions, tariffs, export controls, investment screening, and subsidies. But while economic statecraft is becoming common, rules remain scarce. Questions about notice, duration, proportionality, harm minimization, compensation, retaliation, and/or rebalancing lack clear answers and seem almost theoretical. Once, we might have hoped the World Trade Organization (WTO) would play a role in developing such rules. But in the absence of an Appellate Body and in the face of state rejections of review, WTO’s deliberative processes have ground to a halt. This essay argues for a new approach, focused less on adjudicating security disputes than on developing best practices for invoking and using trade security measures. It explains why a new approach is necessary, detailing both how the WTO’s deliberative engine broke down and why dispute settlement is ill-suited to develop guidance now needed. It suggests where and how best practices might be developed, before considering an agenda for such a best practice process. In the end, the hope is a process that can develop expectations—expectations that might make a world of economic statecraft a bit less dangerous.
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.70%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Economic Law is dedicated to encouraging thoughtful and scholarly attention to a very broad range of subjects that concern the relation of law to international economic activity, by providing the major English language medium for publication of high-quality manuscripts relevant to the endeavours of scholars, government officials, legal professionals, and others. The journal"s emphasis is on fundamental, long-term, systemic problems and possible solutions, in the light of empirical observations and experience, as well as theoretical and multi-disciplinary approaches.
期刊最新文献
Dynamic diffusion The automatic termination clause in the Fisheries Subsidies Agreement—brinkmanship for future negotiation or a time bomb for self-destruction? The utility of appellate review at the WTO and its optimal structure Rethinking the ‘Full Reparation’ standard in energy investment arbitration: how to take climate change into account Regulatory autonomy in digital trade agreements
×
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