IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v1y2002i01p47-62_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why are safeguards under the WTO so unpopular?

Author

Listed:
  • BOWN, CHAD P.

Abstract

In recent years, more countries have increasingly turned to explicit, codified trade policy instruments of the international trading system such as antidumping measures. Countries have also increasingly participated in the institutions established to facilitate trade in the international system, such as the WTO's Dispute Settlement Understanding. Given these phenomena, a natural question to consider is why haven't countries resorted to the WTO's safeguards provisions at a similar pace? This paper focuses on the economic incentives generated by reforms in the Uruguay Round, and argues that in order to address the relative unpopularity of the application of safeguards measures, further reforms must be made to WTO's Antidumping Agreement and the rules of the Dispute Settlement Understanding.

Suggested Citation

  • Bown, Chad P., 2002. "Why are safeguards under the WTO so unpopular?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 47-62, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:1:y:2002:i:01:p:47-62_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S147474560100101X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Malkawi, Bashar H., 2016. "Trade Defense Actions in Arab Countries' Free Trade Agreements with the U.S.: The Case of Safeguards," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 17(1), pages 1-25.
    2. Hartigan James C., 2015. "Did the Agreement on Safeguards Nullify their Use?," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 155-172, March.
    3. Irwin, Douglas A., 2003. "Causing problems? The WTO review of causation and injury attribution in US Section 201 cases," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 297-325, November.
    4. Tadashi Ito, 2007. "NAFTA and productivity convergence between Mexico and the US," IHEID Working Papers 26-2007, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies, revised 27 Nov 2007.
    5. Pao-Li Chang, 2004. "The Politics of WTO Enforcement Mechanisms," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 117, Econometric Society.
    6. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2008. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-77, September.
    7. Chad P. Bown, 2005. "Trade Remedies and World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement: Why Are So Few Challenged?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 515-555, June.
    8. Kitano, Taiju & Ohashi, Hiroshi, 2009. "Did US safeguards resuscitate Harley-Davidson in the 1980s?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 186-197, November.
    9. Chad Bown, 2013. "How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 449-481, June.
    10. Kagitani, Koichi & Harimaya, Kozo, 2015. "Safeguards and voluntary export restraints under the World Trade Organization," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 29-41.
    11. Beshkar, Mostafa, 2009. "Trade skirmishes and safeguards: A theory of the WTO Dispute Settlement Process," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2009-09, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    12. Hartigan, James C., 2018. "Punching out of one's weight class? Cross agreement retaliation in the WTO," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 274-288.
    13. Bown, Chad P. & McCulloch, Rachel, 2009. "U.S.-Japan and U.S.-China trade conflict: Export growth, reciprocity, and the international trading system," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 669-687, November.
    14. Bernard Hoekman & Petros Mavroidis, 2023. "Reassessing the Safeguards Mess," RSCAS Working Papers 2023/14, European University Institute.
    15. Beshkar, Mostafa, 2010. "Trade skirmishes safeguards: A theory of the WTO dispute settlement process," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 35-48, September.

    More about this item

    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:cup:wotrrv:v:1:y:2002:i:01:p:47-62_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    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.