IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Punching out of one's weight class? Cross agreement retaliation in the WTO


  • Hartigan, James C.


Agreements are expressed in terms of the level of standards, which serves as a proxy for the degree of permitted discretion. A pair of sub-agreements constitutes the treaty. The extent to which preferences of governments entail cross agreement linkages in negotiation are presented. The model is applied to the WTO's DSU, revealing that it contributes to performance of the agreement when a regime is elected desiring weaker commitments. When cross agreement retaliation is more effective than within agreement retaliation is disclosed. This does not depend upon power disparities of the signatories, although implications for the achievement of negotiations may exist. This template helps you to create a properly formatted manuscript.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reveco:v:54:y:2018:i:c:p:274-288
    DOI: 10.1016/j.iref.2017.09.002

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Michihiro Kandori, 1992. "Repeated Games Played by Overlapping Generations of Players," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 81-92.
    2. Klimenko, Mikhail & Ramey, Garey & Watson, Joel, 2008. "Recurrent trade agreements and the value of external enforcement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 475-499, March.
    3. Sergei Guriev & Mikhail Klimenko, 2015. "Duration and Term Structure of Trade Agreements," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(589), pages 1818-1849, December.
    4. Davis, Christina L., 2004. "International Institutions and Issue Linkage: Building Support for Agricultural Trade Liberalization," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(1), pages 153-169, February.
    5. Gal Hochman, 2008. "Trade negotiations, domestic policies, and the Most Favored Nation clause," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 781-795, August.
    6. Richard Chisik & Harun Onder, 2017. "Does Limited Punishment Limit The Scope For Cross Retaliation?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(3), pages 1213-1230, July.
    7. Giovanni Maggi & Robert W. Staiger, 2011. "The Role of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Trade Agreements," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 126(1), pages 475-515.
    8. Henrik Horn & Giovanni Maggi & Robert W. Staiger, 2010. "Trade Agreements as Endogenously Incomplete Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 394-419, March.
    9. Zissimos, Ben, 2007. "The GATT and gradualism," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 410-433, April.
    10. Paola Conconi & Carlo Perroni, 2005. "Conditionality, Separation, and Open Rules in Multilateral Institutions," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/5843, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Ludema, Rodney D., 2001. "Optimal international trade agreements and dispute settlement procedures," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 355-376, June.
    12. Beshkar, Mostafa, 2010. "Optimal remedies in international trade agreements," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 455-466, April.
    13. Dan Kovenock & Marie Thursby, 1992. "Gatt, Dispute Settlement And Cooperation," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 151-170, July.
    14. Conconi, Paola & Sahuguet, Nicolas, 2009. "Policymakers' horizon and the sustainability of international cooperation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 549-558, April.
    15. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 11, pages 227-263, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Frischmann Brett M. & Hartigan James C., 2011. "Compliance Institutions in Treaties," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 86-117, May.
    17. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    18. 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.
    19. James C. Hartigan, 2016. "In or Out? Standards, Discretion, Compliance and the WTO," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 738-754, June.
    20. John H. Jackson, 1997. "The World Trading System, 2nd Edition: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262600277, August.
    21. S. K. Mitchell, 1997. "GATT, Dispute Settlement and Cooperation: A Note," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 87-93, March.
    22. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1990. "Multimarket Contact and Collusive Behavior," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
    23. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2005. "Enforcement, Private Political Pressure, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization Escape Clause," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 471-513, June.
    24. James C. Hartigan, 2011. "Making Sense of Safeguards," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 809-820, November.
    25. Koremenos, Barbara, 2005. "Contracting around International Uncertainty," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(4), pages 549-565, November.
    26. Rosendorff, B. Peter & Milner, Helen V., 2001. "The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 829-857, October.
    27. Leslie Johns, 2014. "Depth versus rigidity in the design of international trade agreements," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(3), pages 468-495, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:eee:reveco:v:54:y:2018:i:c:p:274-288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.