IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2020-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Informing WTO Reform: Dispute Settlement Performance, 1995-2020

Author

Listed:
  • Bernard M. Hoekman
  • Petros C. Mavroidis
  • Maarja Saluste

Abstract

This paper presents salient facts on the performance of WTO dispute settlement, using an updated dataset on cases adjudicated between 1992 and mid 2020. The dataset provides a comprehensive compilation of information on WTO disputes, including complainants, respondents and third parties; the substantive matters tabled; the WTO provisions invoked; the claims that are accepted or rejected by adjudicating bodies; the time involved to complete the consultation, panel and appeal (Appellate Body) stages; and the identity of panelists and how they were appointed. We highlight elements of the operation of the system that are salient to WTO reform discussions, while drawing attention to the richness of the dataset by highlighting stylized facts in the hope others will use the data to investigate specific research questions and hypotheses.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Maarja Saluste, 2020. "Informing WTO Reform: Dispute Settlement Performance, 1995-2020," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/59, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2020/59
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/68356/RSCAS%202020_59.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/68356
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannesson, Louise & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2015. "Black Cat, White Cat: The Identity of the WTO Judges," Working Paper Series 1066, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Johannesson, Louise & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2017. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2015: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," Working Paper Series 1148, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    3. Fiorini, Matteo & Mavroidis, Petros C. & Saluste, Maarja & Wolfe, Robert, 2020. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Appellate Body: Insider perceptions and Members’ revealed preferences," CEPR Discussion Papers 14834, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. William J. Davey, 2014. "The WTO and Rules-Based Dispute Settlement: Historical Evolution, Operational Success, and Future Challenges," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 679-700.
    5. Mavroidis, Petros C. & Meagher, Niall & Prusa, Thomas J. & Yanguas, Tatiana, 2017. "Ask for the Moon, Settle for the Stars: What is a Reasonable Period to Comply with WTO Awards?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 395-425, April.
    6. Chad P. Bown & Bernard M. Hoekman, 2005. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Missing Developing Country Cases: Engaging the Private Sector," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 861-890, December.
    7. Horn, Henrik & Johannesson, Louise & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2011. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2010: Some Descriptive Statistics," Working Paper Series 891, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    8. Schwartz, Warren F & Sykes, Alan O, 2002. "The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 179-204, January.
    9. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2020. "Preventing the Bad from Getting Worse: The End of the World (Trade Organization) As We Know it?," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/06, European University Institute.
    10. Louise Johannesson & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2016. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2016: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/72, European University Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johannesson, Louise & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2017. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2015: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," Working Paper Series 1148, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2020. "To AB or Not to AB? Dispute Settlement in WTO Reform," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/34, European University Institute.
    3. Louise Johannesson & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2016. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2016: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/72, European University Institute.
    4. Matteo Fiorini & Bernard Hoekman & Petros Mavroidis, Maarja Saluste and Robert Wolfe, 2019. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Appellate Body Crisis: Insider Perceptions and Members’ Revealed Preferences," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/95, European University Institute.
    5. Conconi, Paola & DeRemer, David R. & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Trimarchi, Lorenzo & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2017. "Suspiciously timed trade disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 57-76.
    6. Robert Wolfe, 2020. "Reforming WTO Conflict Management. Why and How to Improve the Use of “Specific Trade Concerns”," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/53, European University Institute.
    7. Lee, Jiwon & Wittgenstein, Teresa, 2017. "Weak vs. Strong Ties: Explaining Early Settlement in WTO Disputes," ILE Working Paper Series 7, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    8. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    9. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Robert W. Staiger & Alan O. Sykes, 2017. "How Important Can the Non-violation Clause Be for the GATT/WTO?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 149-187, May.
    11. Fiorini, Matteo & Mavroidis, Petros C. & Saluste, Maarja & Wolfe, Robert, 2020. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Appellate Body: Insider perceptions and Members’ revealed preferences," CEPR Discussion Papers 14834, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Johannesson, Louise, 2016. "Supporting Developing Countries in WTO Dispute Settlement," Working Paper Series 1120, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    13. Kazutaka Takechi, 2023. "How are the precedents of trade policy rules made under the World Trade Organization?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 806-821, November.
    14. Conconi, Paola & DeRemer, David R. & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Trimarchi, Lorenzo & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2017. "Suspiciously timed trade disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 57-76.
    15. Apergi, Maria & Zimmermann, Eva & Weko, Silvia & Lilliestam, Johan, 2023. "Is renewable energy technology trade more or less conflictive than other trade?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    16. Taiji Furusawa, 2009. "WTO as Moral Support," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(SI), pages 327-337, May.
    17. Götz, Christian & Heckelei, Thomas & Rudloff, Bettina, 2010. "What makes countries initiate WTO disputes on food-related issues?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 154-162, April.
    18. Evgeny N. Smirnov & Sergey A. Lukyanov, 2021. "Instability of international trade and approaches to optimal regulation," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 12(5), pages 21-31, November.
    19. Robert W. Staiger & Alan O. Sykes, 2021. "The Economic Structure of International Trade-in-Services Agreements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(4), pages 1287-1317.
    20. Rachel Brewster & Claire Brunel & Anna Maria Mayda, 2015. "Trade in Environmental Goods: A Review of the WTO Appellate Body’s Ruling in US — Countervailing Measures (China)," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/69, European University Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    WTO; trade disputes; conflict resolution; panels; Appellate Body;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • K - Law and Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rsc:rsceui:2020/59. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.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.