nach oben

The Review of International Organizations

Erschienen in:

03.07.2015

Enduring trade disputes: Disguised protectionism and duration and recurrence of international trade disputes

verfasst von: Moonhawk Kim

Erschienen in: The Review of International Organizations | Ausgabe 3/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Why do some WTO trade disputes endure and recur while others do not? States have difficulty resolving trade conflicts when they involve certain types of trade-restrictive domestic regulations. While such regulations vary in their extent of legitimacy—fulfilling non-trade domestic regulatory objectives and availability of less trade-restrictive options—complainant states cannot always distinguish legitimate barriers from illegitimate ones. In such scenarios of disguised protectionism, which I argue is most prevalent with policies involving WTO’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement, disputants confront difficulties concluding their disputes. Disputes last longer and are more likely to recur. I test the argument against a data set of WTO disputes structured in an innovative manner—one that links together related and recurring disputes into single conflicts. Both an event history analysis of conflict duration and a count analysis of conflict recurrence using this data strongly support this argument.

Nächster Artikel Promoting trade through private law: Explaining international legal harmonization

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

See Leitner and Lester (2015) and the preceding annual pieces for descriptive summaries of trade disputes at the WTO.

“China–U.S. Trade Dispute Has Broad Implications,” The New York Times, September 15, 2009.

I thank Leslie Johns for suggesting this framework for casting the two types. The formulation is also similar to Carrubba (2005), in which two countries have different costs to compliance.

The existence of alternative policies that are multilaterally more acceptable as a component of legitimacy is similar to Pelc (2010).

Alternatively, the complainants’ discount factor can be specified so that they choose to settle now rather than engage in a drawn-out bargaining against the sincere type.

A contrasting approach would be to have different time horizons and discount values for the bargainers (e.g., Cramton 1984).

The parameter that captures the uncertainty in Grossman and Perry (1986b) is a probability distribution F(r) bounded by r _l, a low reservation value assessment of the respondent type by the complainant and r _h, a high reservation value. The information precision is decreasing in the distance between the bounds.

“Understanding the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.” World Trade Organization (WTO). https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsund_e.htm. Accessed May 12, 2015.

Accordingly, this is different from Bown and Reynolds (2015), who identify common disputes based on repeating patterns of complainant-disputed policy.

The results of these robustness checks are available on the journal’s website.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratope/dispue/dispustatuse.htm. Accessed September 11, 2014.

The results of these robustness checks are available on the journal’s website.

For the EU, the rounded average Polity score among the evolving membership does not fall below 10.

An alternative approach would track changes in respondents’ policy, which can mark the start of a conflict a la Bown and Reynolds (2015).

TRIMs has the lowest maximum number of provisions cited—4—and the fewest cases of positive counts.

Allee, T. (2004). Legal incentives and domestic rewards: The selection of trade disputes for GATT/WTO dispute resolution.

Allee, T. (2005). The political and economic value of GATT/WTO dispute initiation. In In 2005 annual meeting of the american political science association. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.

Allee, T. L., & Huth, P. K. (2006). Legitimizing dispute settlement: international legal rulings as dometic political cover. American Political Science Review, 100(2), 219–234.CrossRef

Barton, J., et al. (2006). The evolution of the trade regime: Politics, law and economics of the GATT and WTO. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Beaulieu, E., & Gaisford, J. (2002). Labour and environmental standards: the ‘lemons problem’ in international trade policy. World Economy, 25(1), 59–78.CrossRef

Bechtel, M. M., & Sattler, T. (2015). What is litigation in the world trade organization worth? International Organization.

Bernauer, T. (2003). Genes, trade, and regulation: The seeds of conflict in food biotechnology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bown, C. P. (2004). On the economic success of GATT/WTO dispute settlement. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(3), 811–823.CrossRef

Bown, C. P., & Reynolds, K. M. (2014). Trade flows and trade disputes. Washington, DC: World Bank Development Research Group. Policy Research Working Paper.CrossRef

Bown, C. P., & Reynolds, K. M. (2015). Trade agreements and enforcement: Evidence from WTO dispute settlement. Washington, DC: World Bank Group—Development Research Group—Trade; International Integration Team. Policy Research Working Paper.

Bureau, J. C., Marette, S., & Schiavina, A. (1998). Non-tariff trade barriers and consumers’ information: the case of the EU-US trade dispute over beef. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 25(4), 437–462.CrossRef

Busch, M. L., & Pelc, K. J. (2010). The politics of judicial economy at the world trade organization. International Organization, 64(2), 257–279.CrossRef

Busch, M. L., & Reinhardt, E. (2000). Bargaining in the shadow of the law: early settlement in GATT/WTO disputes. Fordham International Law Journal, 24(1–2), 158–172.

Busch, M. L., & Reinhardt, E. (2002). Testing international trade law: Empirical studies of GATT/WTO dispute settlement. In D. L. M. Kennedy & J. D. Southwick (Eds.), The political economy of international trade law: Essays in honor of robert e. hudec (pp. 457–481). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Busch, M. L., & Reinhardt, E. (2003). Developing countries and general agreement on tariffs and trade/World trade organization dispute settlement. Journal of World Trade, 37(4), 719–735.

Busch, M. L., & Reinhardt, E. (2006). Three’s a crowd: third parties and WTO dispute settlement. World Politics, 58(3), 446–477.CrossRef

Carrubba, C. J. (2005). Courts and compliance in international regulatory regimes. Journal of Politics, 67(3), 669–689.CrossRef

Chaudoin, S. (2014). Audiences features and the strategic timing of trade disputes. International Organization, 68(1), 1–35.CrossRef

Chaudoin, S., Kucik, J., & Pelc, K. J. (2013). Do WTO disputes actually increase trade?

Cleves, M. et al. (2008). An introduction to survival analysis using stata. Second. Stata Press.

Cramton, P. C. (1984). Bargaining with incomplete information: an infinite-horizon model with two-sided uncertainty. Review of Economic Studies, 51(4), 579–593.CrossRef

Davis, C. L. (2012). Why adjudicate? Enforcing trade rules in the WTO. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Davis, C. L., & Bermeo, S. B. (2009). Who files? Developing country participation in GATT/WTO adjudication. Journal of Politics, 71(3), 1033–1049.CrossRef

Davis, C. & Shirato, Y. (2007). Firms, governments, and WTO adjudication. 59(2): 274–313.

Elsig, M., & Stucki, P. (2012). Low-income developing countries and WTO litigation. 19(2), 292–316.

Esty, D. C. (1994). Greening the GATT: Trade, environment, and the future. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

Esty, D. (2002). Rejoinder. World Trade Review, 1(3), 297–299.CrossRef

Fattore, C. (2013). The influence of legal capacity on WTO dispute duration. International Trade Journal, 27(5), 450–464.CrossRef

Goldstein, J. L., & Steinberg, R. H. (2009). Regulatory shift: The rise of judicial liberalization at the WTO. In W. Mattli & N. Woods (Eds.), The politics of global regulation (pp. 211–241). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Grinols, E. L., & Perrelli, R. (2006). The WTO impact on international trade disputes: an event history analysis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 613–624.CrossRef

Grossman, S. J., & Perry, M. (1986a). Perfect sequential equilibrium. Journal of Economic Theory, 39(1), 97–119.CrossRef

Grossman, S. J., & Perry, M. (1986b). Sequential bargaining under asymmetric information. Journal of Economic Theory, 39(1), 120–154.CrossRef

Guzman, A., & Simmons, B. A. (2002). To settle or empanel? An empirical analysis of litigation and settlement at the world trade organization. Journal of Legal Studies, 31(1), S205–S235.CrossRef

Guzman, A. T., & Simmons, B. A. (2005). Power plays and capacity constraints: the selection of defendants in world trade organization disputes. Journal of Legal Studies, 34(2), 557–598.CrossRef

Hobbs, J. E., Kerr, W. A., & Phillips, P. W. B. (2001). Identity preservation and international trade: signaling quality across national boundaries. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49(4), 567–579.CrossRef

Hofmann, T., & Kim, S. Y. (2010). The domestic politics of compliance: Explaining time-to-compliance in WTO disputes. In In Annual meeting of the american political science association. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.

Horn, H. & Mavroidis, P. C. (2013.) The WTO dispute settlement data set 1995–2011: User’s guide. 3.0.

Hudec, R. E. (1993). Enforcing international trade law: The evolution of the modern GATT legal system. Salem: Butterworth Legal Publishers.

Johns, L. & Pelc, K. J. (2014). Fear of crowds in WTO disputes: Why don’t more countries participate?

Kerr, W. A. (1999). International trade in transgenic food products: a new focus for agricultural trade disputes. World Economy, 22(2), 245–259.CrossRef

Kim, M. (2008). Costly procedures: divergent effects of legalization in the GATT/WTO dispute settlement procedures. International Studies Quarterly, 52(3), 657–686.CrossRef

Kim, M. (2012). Disguised protectionism and linkages to the GATT/WTO. World Politics, 64(3), 426–475.CrossRef

Kono, D. Y. (2006). Optimal obfuscation: democracy and trade policy transparency. American Political Science Review, 100(3), 369–384.CrossRef

Kucik, J., & Pelc, K. J. Forthcoming. Measuring the cost of privacy: A look at the distributional effects of private bargaining. British Journal of Political Science.

Lawrence, R. Z. (2007). The united states and the WTO dispute settlement system. Washington, DC: Council on Foreign Relations. Council Special Reports.

Leitner, K., & Lester, S. (2015). WTO dispute settlement 1995–2014: a statistical analysis. Journal of International Economic Law, 18(1), 203–214.CrossRef

Licht, A. A. (2011). Change comes with time: substantive interpretation of nonproportional hazards in event history analysis. Political Analysis, 19(2), 227–243.CrossRef

Mansfield, E. D., & Reinhardt, E. (2003). Multilateral determinants of regionalism: the effects of GATT/WTO on the formation of preferential trading arrangements. International Organization, 57(4), 829–862.CrossRef

Márquez Peña, J. (2014). MoreClarify: Stata module to estimate quantities of interest through simulation and resampling methods.

Marshall, M. G., & Gurr, T. R. Polity IV project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–2012.

Pelc, K. J. (2009). Seeking escape: the use of escape clauses in international trade agreements. International Studies Quarterly, 53(2), 349–368.CrossRef

Pelc, K. J. (2010). Constraining coercion? Legitimacy and its role in U.S. trade policy, 1975–2000. International Organization, 64(1), 65–96.CrossRef

Pelc, K. J. (2014). The politics of precedent in international law: a social network application. American Political Science Review, 108(3), 547–564.CrossRef

Pervez, F. (2014a). Elections and dropped WTO trade disputes.

Pervez, F. (2015). Waiting for election season: the timing of international trade disputes. Review of International Organizations.

Pollack, M. A., & Shaffer, G. C. (2009). When cooperation fails: The international law and politics of genetically modified foods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of 2-level games. International Organization, 42(3), 427–460.CrossRef

Reinhardt, E. (2001). Adjudication without enforcement in GATT disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45(4), 174–195.CrossRef

Reynolds, K. M. (2009). Why are so many WTO disputes abandoned? In J. C. Hartigan (Ed.), Trade disputes and the dispute settlement understanding of the WTO (pp. 191–211). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

Rodrik, D. (1997). Has globalization gone too far? Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

Rosendorff, B. P. (2005). Stability and rigidity: politics and design of the WTO’s dispute settlement procedure. American Political Science Review, 99(3), 389–400.CrossRef

Rossmiller, G. E. (1994). Discussion. In Agricultural trade conflicts and GATT, eds. Giovanni Anania, Colin A. Carter, and Alex F. McCalla. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, p. 262–265.

Rubinstein, A. (1982). Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica, 50(1), 97–109.CrossRef

Rubinstein, A. (1985). A bargaining model with incomplete information about time preferences. Econometrica, 53(5), 1151–1172.CrossRef

Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.CrossRef

Shaffer, G. (2003). How to make the WTO dispute settlement system work for developing countries: Some proactive developing country strategies. Geneva, Switzerland: International Centre for Trade; Sustainable Development (ICTSD). ICTSD Resource Paper.

World Bank. World development indicators.

Titel: Enduring trade disputes: Disguised protectionism and duration and recurrence of international trade disputes
verfasst von: Moonhawk Kim
Publikationsdatum: 03.07.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: The Review of International Organizations / Ausgabe 3/2016
Print ISSN: 1559-7431
Elektronische ISSN: 1559-744X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-015-9230-z

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2016

Graham Bird and Dane Rowlands. 2016. The International Monetary Fund: Distinguishing Reality from Rhetoric (Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar)

Promoting trade through private law: Explaining international legal harmonization

Hylke Dijkstra. 2016. International Organizations and Military Affairs (London: Routledge)

A porous humanitarian shield: The laws of war, the red cross, and the killing of civilians

When and why is civil society support “made-in-America”? Delegation to non-state actors in American democracy promotion

Erratum to: William Phelan. 2015. In place of inter-state retaliation: The European Union’s rejection of WTO-style trade sanctions (Oxford: Oxford University Press)