scholarly journals The Relative Success of WTO Dispute Settlement and What Planet Would the EU Investment Court System Be On? A Rejoinder to AJIL Unbound Comments

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 316-318
Author(s):  
Joost Pauwelyn
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court System ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Many ◽  
Better Than ◽  
The Eu

I am extremely grateful, and humbled, by the wealth of comments received on my AJIL article through this AJIL Unbound Symposium. One of the many points I take away from these reactions is, indeed, that my analysis offers a snapshot and that many of the critiques now leveled against Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) are, in Catherine Rogers’s words, “effectively recycled versions of criticisms that were originally leveled against the WTO and its decision-makers.” (Freya Baetens makes a similar point.)In this rejoinder, I would only like to make two points. Firstly, many commentators seem to think that in this article I took the normative position that World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement is “better” than ISDS. Although I did point to the current discrepancy in public perception of the respective regimes, I purposefully avoided expressing any personal, normative position on one being “better” than the other (but apparently not explicitly enough).

scholarly journals Apparent Dichotomies, Covert Similarities: A Response to Joost Pauwelyn

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 294-301
Author(s):  
Catherine A. Rogers
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
Legal Training

In his thoughtful article, Joost Pauwelyn poses a perplexing question: How can it be that trade and investment are converging in their substantive “legal orders,” but diverging in terms of perceived legitimacy? Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), he argues, is in a “state of crisis” whereas World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement is generally regarded as “successful.” Pauwelyn’s provocative and counter-intuitive explanation for this paradox focuses on the apparent differences between the pool of decision-makers in each regime: WTO disputes are resolved by nameless, faceless, panel-inexperienced bureaucrats who often lack legal training, whereas “investment arbitrators are typically high-powered, elite jurists” with more expertise and experience than their WTO counterparts.

Conclusions to Part II

2019 ◽  
pp. 161-166
Author(s):  
Sivan Shlomo Agon
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Goal Attainment ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Other ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Rule Compliance ◽  
The World ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
The One

When asked what, if anything, distinguishes US-Clove Cigarettes from other disputes filed with the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement System (DSS), an Appellate Body (AB) Secretariat staff member replied: ‘A number of things and nothing at the same time’.1 This answer aptly captures the story of trade-and disputes and the DSS’s goal-attainment patterns in such cases, as revealed in this second part of the book. On the one hand, as in all WTO disputes, the DSS appears to be engaged in this class of cases in the routine legal exercise of law application and interpretation while pursuing its multiple goals, including rule-compliance and dispute resolution. On the other hand, as a WTO practitioner remarked when discussing the ‘interpretative exercise’ carried out by the DSS in trade-and disputes:...

Issues and Strategies in Reconciling the Malaysia-EU Palm Oil Discord

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Ratnaria Wahid ◽  
Norafidah Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Palm Oil ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Oil Sector ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Eu

The EU has decided to phase out imports of palm oil used in biofuels in the EU by 2030. This affects people in Malaysia who rely on the palm oil business for their livelihood. This chapter examines the events leading up to the EU's anti-palm oil actions and the many ways in which Malaysia has responded to defend its palm oil sector. This includes 1) countering EU's allegation through scientific research, 2) demonstrating its commitment to transform the palm oil industry toward sustainability through certification standards, 3) fostering the commitment to grow palm oil sustainably, 4) garnering support from ASEAN and the international community, 5) expressing its opposition and warnings for retaliatory measures against the EU, and 6) requesting consultation under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. It presents the political processes that generate policy interventions aimed at defending palm oil trade with the EU alerting that economic decoupling and direct conflict may exacerbate the problem, weaken bilateral relations, and elude good improvements in the palm oil business.

scholarly journals Boomerangs over Lac Léman: Transnational Lobbying and Foreign Venue Shopping in WTO Dispute Settlement

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 507-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAPPE ECKHARDT ◽  
DIRK DE BIÈVRE
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Classical World ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Foreign Government ◽  
The Us ◽  
Venue Shopping ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn this article, we explore the conditions under which firms engage in transnational lobbying and foreign venue shopping in the framework of WTO dispute settlement. Classical World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement cases mostly originate in domestic firms instigating their public authorities to bring a complaint against foreign trade barriers incompatible with WTO law. In recent years, however, we have witnessed the rise of WTO cases in which firms get a foreign government to file a case against its own authorities. By analysing transnational lobbying by EU firms in the WTO footwear case filed by China against the EU, and by US firms in the WTO gambling case Antigua brought against the US, we highlight the increasing resemblance between trade disputes and investment disputes.

General Principles for Integration

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
World Trade Organisation ◽  
Resolution Function ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
History Of ◽  
Prior Analysis

This chapter reviews the broader principles in the international intellectual property (IP) system that fulfil an indirect integration or conflict resolution function, with a focus on those emanating from and applicable to the Trade Related Aspects of International Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. In focusing on Articles 7 and 8 of TRIPS, the chapter builds on prior analysis about the role of these provisions in establishing an agreed, common object and purpose of the principal global IP treaty with relevance beyond TRIPS. In light of the origins and negotiation history of Articles 7 and 8 TRIPS, the chapter shows how these provisions can be applied to integrate ‘external’ objectives and interests via interpretation and implementation. Next, this chapter reviews their very poor record of application in the first twenty years of World Trade Organisation (WTO) dispute settlement. It concludes with suggestions for an appropriate recognition of external norms, objectives, and interests via Articles 7 and 8.

European Communities —Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products. WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, & WT/DS293/R

2007 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 453-459
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky ◽  
Simon Lester
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
The United States ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Panel Report ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Production And Consumption ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Biotech Products

European Communities—Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products. WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, & WT/DS293/R. At <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm>.World Trade Organization Panel, September 29, 2006 (adopted November 21, 2006).In what was by far the longest panel report in the World Trade Organization’s history, a WTO panel ruled last September that various parts of the European Communities’ regulatory regime for the approval and marketing of “biotech products” (that is, products that contain, or are made from or with, genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) violated the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). The panel report was not appealed and was adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on November 21, 2006.In recent years, a heated international debate has developed regarding the production and consumption of food made from or with GMOs. Among the key players in this debate, the United States, supported by many companies who have developed GMO-based products, has pushed for their acceptance; by contrast, the European Communities (EC) and its member states, backed by consumer groups and other activists, have tried to restrict their use through various regulations.

The WTO Bananas Decision: Cutting Through the Thicket

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce R. Hirsh
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Trade In Services ◽  
Allocation System ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Quota Allocation ◽  
The Eu

The Bananas decision demonstrated that WTO dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body are capable of effectively and clearly analyzing whether extremely complex measures are consistent with WTO rules. The trade-liberalizing decision established the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) as a meaningful constraint on discriminatory measures with an impact on both goods and services and clarified the nature of the GATS Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) obligation. The decision also severely constrained the ability of the EU to justify non-tariff discriminatory measures such as the quota allocation system at issue in Bananas based on the Lomé waiver.

Development of a Single-Code/Default Coding Strategy in Pigeons

2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tricia S. Clement ◽  
Thomas R. Zentall
Keyword(s):  
Conditional Discrimination ◽  
The Other ◽  
Matching Accuracy ◽  
Efficient Coding ◽  
Coding Strategy ◽  
One To One ◽  
Retention Intervals ◽  
The Many ◽  
The One ◽  
Better Than

We tested the hypothesis that pigeons could use a cognitively efficient coding strategy by training them on a conditional discrimination (delayed symbolic matching) in which one alternative was correct following the presentation of one sample (one-to-one), whereas the other alternative was correct following the presentation of any one of four other samples (many-to-one). When retention intervals of different durations were inserted between the offset of the sample and the onset of the choice stimuli, divergent retention functions were found. With increasing retention interval, matching accuracy on trials involving any of the many-to-one samples was increasingly better than matching accuracy on trials involving the one-to-one sample. Furthermore, following this test, pigeons treated a novel sample as if it had been one of the many-to-one samples. The data suggest that rather than learning each of the five sample-comparison associations independently, the pigeons developed a cognitively efficient single-code/default coding strategy.

Conclusion

2019 ◽  
pp. 312-332
Author(s):  
Sivan Shlomo Agon
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Institutional Changes ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The World ◽  
International Adjudication ◽  
Dispute Settlement System

The present chapter concludes the work. It sums up the key findings of the study while discussing the results emerging from a comparative analysis of the three categories of disputes examined throughout the book. The chapter then revisits the central arguments put forth in the book and articulates the lessons to be learned for the study of the goals, operation, and effectiveness of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement System (DSS), and of international courts more broadly. It also discusses some of the insights to be offered with respect to possible institutional changes or reforms of the WTO DSS, with a view to ensuring the system’s future effectiveness. The chapter closes with several observations that go beyond effectiveness, pertaining to the costs and unintended consequences attendant on more effective and empowered international adjudication.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document