IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/usg/auswrt/20035802169-214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Balance of Power in WTO Decision-Making: Towards Weighted Voting in Legislative Response

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Cottier
  • Satoko Takenoshita

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Cottier & Satoko Takenoshita, 2003. "The Balance of Power in WTO Decision-Making: Towards Weighted Voting in Legislative Response," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 58(02), pages 169-214, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:usg:auswrt:2003:58:02:169-214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ux-tauri.unisg.ch/RePEc/usg/auswrt/AW_58-02__01_Cottier-Takenoshita.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas A. Zimmermann, 2005. "WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences, and Evaluation," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 60(01), pages 27-61, March.
    2. Zimmermann, Thomas A., 2010. "The dangerous rise of economic interventionism," MPRA Paper 37262, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Manfred Elsig, 2010. "The World Trade Organization at work: Performance in a member-driven milieu," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 345-363, September.
    4. Simon J. Evenett, 2003. "The Failure of the WTO Ministerial Meeting in Cancun: Implications for Further Research," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 4(03), pages 11-17, October.
    5. Simon J. Evenett, 2003. "The Failure of the WTO Ministerial Meeting in Cancun: Implications for Further Research," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 4(3), pages 11-17, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:usg:auswrt:2003:58:02:169-214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stefan Legge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/siasrch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.