Legalization as Strategy: The Asia-Pacific Case

2000 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miles Kahler
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
Global Institutions ◽  
Third Party Dispute Resolution

The Asia-Pacific region offers an example of low legalization of regional institutions and perhaps an explicit aversion to legalization. An examination of three key regional institutions—ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation), and the ARF (ASEAN Regional Forum)—confirms a regional process of institution building without legalization. Recent developments in these institutions permit some discrimination among competing explanations for low legalization. On the one hand, ASEAN has embraced a legalized dispute-settlement mechanism; Asian governments have also employed legalized global institutions. On the other hand, the ARF and APEC continue to resist clear-cut legal obligations and third-party dispute resolution. This pattern suggests that legalization is best viewed as driven by the demands of economic integration and as a strategic response by governments in particular institutional settings. These explanations undermine alternatives based on domestic legal culture and uniformly high sovereignty costs. The Asian economic crisis has reopened a debate over regional institutions, which may fix on legalization as part of a new regional institutional design.

scholarly journals International Law and dispute settlement mechanism

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Ricardo Caichiolo
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
21St Century ◽  
International Conflict ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
Feasible Solutions ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The DSM, or Dispute Settlement Mechanism, in the absence of a judicial body, is the closest representation of a supreme court or judicial institution in a regional bloc or other international organisation. The search for a peaceful settlement of disputes in the international arena had led to the development of the DSM during the 20th and into the 21st century. The DSM acts as an impartial third party, wherein it intervenes in any international conflict to offer feasible solutions for both sides.O MSC, ou Mecanismo de Solução de Controvérsias, na ausência de um órgão judicial, é a representação mais próxima de uma Corte Suprema ou de instituição judiciária em um bloco regionl ou em organização internacional diversa. A busca por um meio pacífico de solução de disputas no meio internacional levou à criação do MSC ao longo dos séculos XX e XXI. O MSC age como um terceiro imparcial, na medida em que ele intervém em conflitos internacionais com o intuito de ofertar soluções possíveis para as partes envolvidas.

Does the WTO exacerbate international conflict?

2020 ◽  
pp. 002234332096020
Author(s):  
J Tyson Chatagnier ◽  
Haeyong Lim
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Economic Policies ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Member States ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
Compliant Behavior ◽  
Economic Tools

As one component of its mission to reduce trade barriers and encourage the liberalization of international commerce, the World Trade Organization provides states with a forum in which they can raise and resolve complaints about partners’ unfair trading practices. This mechanism streamlines the process of identifying non-compliant behavior, and provides real incentives for the removal of such policies. By furnishing a form of dispute resolution, the institution should be both trade-inducing and peace-enhancing for member states. However, this very mechanism also has the potential to aggravate existing dispute for two reasons. First, it removes the opportunity for states to use economic policies as instruments of structural linkage in resolving disputes. Second, it deprives its members of powerful economic tools that could be used in lieu of militarized responses. Using the implementation of the WTO Dispute Settlement mechanism, as well as the subsequent expiration of Article 13 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (the so-called ‘peace clause’), we examine whether the opportunity to resolve trade disputes through the organization affects the likelihood that member states engage in militarized conflict with one another. We find that membership in a trade institution facilitates peaceful interaction, but that judicialization erases these benefits. We conclude that institution building requires caution and attention to the possibility of unintended consequences.

scholarly journals What Drives Institutional Reforms in Regional Organisations? Diffusion, Contextual Conditions, and the Modular Design of ASEAN

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Jetschke
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Modular Design ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
The Us ◽  
Regional Organisations ◽  
Available Information ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

AbstractWhat drives institutional reforms in regional organisations? And what explains the institutional design of ASEAN? Despite many differences, conventional approaches to the institutional design of regional organisations more generally and ASEAN in particular are united in regarding them as either determined by factors endogenous to the region − such as varying state interests or collective norms − or as exogenously driven, most importantly by hegemonic states like the US or China. This article offers a diffusion account of ASEAN's institutional design. Building on a more recent strand in the diffusion literature emphasising that diffusion rarely leads to convergence, the article makes two genuine contributions. First, it argues that members of regional organisations engage in modular adoption: they select institutional templates from a variety of regional as well as international organisations thereby taking advantage of available information on the costs and benefits of alternative institutions. Second, it argues that contextual conditions and cognitive priors influence what templates are chosen. The argument will be illustrated with a case study on ASEAN's adoption of a single market and a dispute settlement mechanism. Finally, and contrary to arguments that institutional borrowing might increase the expectations-deliverance gap within regional organisations, it argues that if conducted consistently, modular adoption can lead to substantial innovation and success.

scholarly journals Good Offies, Conciliation, and Mediation in the WTO: Challenges and Perspectives

2018 ◽  
pp. 97-102
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
History Of ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Article 5

Article 5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes lists means of pacifi settlement of disputes that can be used alongside with settlement of a particular dispute or instead of it. Good offies, conciliation and mediation are an adherence of WTO dispute settlement mechanism to the principle of pacifi settlement of disputes in international law enshrined in United Nations Charter and reminder of diplomatic approach that was dominating in the previous GATT system. Nowadays, non-litigious ways of dispute settlement in WTO have a potential to be on rise, due to crisis situation caused by US in Appellate Body and Dispute Settlement Body in general. This article looks into the reasons why means enshrined in the Article 5 were not used by Member states frequently enough since their establishment of the WTO. It looks closely into defiitions and history of the Article 5. The authors come to a conclusion that mediation has a potential and perspectives to be used more frequently in the future of the WTO dispute settlement. Mediation is treated as a unique mechanism that can be used by developing and least-developed countries to receive third-party assistance and mitigate power imbalances. Factors for successful mediation are deducted from the case analysis and interviews with representatives of permanent missions.

Why Not Bargain? The Domestic Politics of Utilizing the World Trade Organization’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism

2020 ◽  
pp. 003232172097834
Author(s):  
Sijeong Lim ◽  
Hyo Won Lee
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
Political Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The World Trade Organization’s dispute settlement mechanism is based on either bilateral bargaining or third-party rulings by a panel or the Appellate Body. When do countries utilize the multilateral procedure, and under what conditions do they opt for a bilateral agreement? Departing from previous studies emphasizing the role of the complainant in shaping the course of the dispute settlement mechanism, this article offers an explanation based on the strategic choices of respondents. This study suggests that the domestic political interests of respondent governments determine the use of the dispute settlement mechanism’s multilateral track. We argue that respondent governments choose the multilateral track to seek political cover for domestically unpopular concessions to a complainant. Such cover is required when (1) the dispute at stake has high public salience and (2) the respondent faces an upcoming election. Our hypotheses are tested using World Trade Organization’s dispute cases from 1995 to 2017.

scholarly journals An Empirical Study of China's Participation in the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism: 2001-2010

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 218-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Zhuang
Keyword(s):  
World Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Settlement System ◽  
Wto Dispute Settlement ◽  
The World ◽  
Dispute Settlement System ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

On 11 December 2001, China officially became a Member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) after years of negotiations. The paper shows how a major developing country has used the WTO dispute settlement system by examining China’s participation in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism from its entry through 31 December 2010. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the WTO dispute cases in which China has participated as a complainant, a respondent, or a third party.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document