IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wtowps/ersd201307.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mapping of dispute settlement mechanisms in regional trade agreements: Innovative or variations on a theme?

Author

Listed:
  • Chase, Claude
  • Yanovich, Alan
  • Crawford, Jo-Ann
  • Ugaz, Pamela

Abstract

Regional trade agreements (RTAs) have become an indelible feature of the international trading landscape. Most, if not all, RTAs contain provisions that establish procedures for resolving disputes among their signatory members. Yet, the design and functioning of these dispute settlement mechanisms (DSMs) and, more specifically, how they differ from the WTO dispute settlement system remain relatively unexplored. Existing academic literature has primarily focused on the narrow issue of jurisdictional conflict between DSMs of RTAs and the WTO dispute settlement system. Literature mapping out and classifying systematically the DSMs of RTAs is more limited. This research paper goes beyond considering the issue of jurisdictional conflict between the multilateral and regional regimes. We map out the DSMs in RTAs that have been notified to the WTO and were in force at the end of 2012, and consider a typology of these DSMs based on their nature and design. We also use the data obtained from our mapping exercise in two ways. First, we identify trends and patterns of use, either regionally or by individual countries, of the different types of DSMs in RTAs. Trends are analysed in relation to five key factors: (i) evolution over time, (ii) level of economic development, (iii) regional characteristics, (iv) level of integration (partial scope agreement, free trade agreement or customs union), and (v) configuration (bilateral or plurilateral). Second, we undertake a nuts and bolts analysis of the DSMs of RTAs by examining their approach to various issues in international dispute settlement. Our aim is to draw conclusions about the extent to which the predominant type of DSM in RTAs has features that are different from those of the WTO dispute settlement system.

Suggested Citation

  • Chase, Claude & Yanovich, Alan & Crawford, Jo-Ann & Ugaz, Pamela, 2013. "Mapping of dispute settlement mechanisms in regional trade agreements: Innovative or variations on a theme?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2013-07, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wtowps:ersd201307
    DOI: 10.30875/93a8fc27-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/80057/1/749852216.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30875/93a8fc27-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Petros C. Mavroidis, 2016. "Dispute Settlement in the WTO. Mind over Matter," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/04, European University Institute.
    2. 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.
    3. Todd Allee & Manfred Elsig, 2016. "Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 89-120, March.
    4. Rana Arslan Tariq, 2015. "Trade and Conflicts: Do Preferential Trade Agreements Matter?," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(4), pages 561-574, December.
    5. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. 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.
    7. Karen Alter, 2016. "William Phelen. 2015. In place of inter-state retaliation: The European Union’s rejection of WTO-style trade sanctions (Oxford: Oxford University Press)," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 145-149, March.
    8. Monteiro, José-Antonio, 2016. "Typology of environment-related provisions in regional trade agreements," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2016-13, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    9. Kuenzel, David J., 2017. "WTO dispute determinants," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 157-179.
    10. Thow, Anne Marie & Snowdon, Wendy & Labonté, Ronald & Gleeson, Deborah & Stuckler, David & Hattersley, Libby & Schram, Ashley & Kay, Adrian & Friel, Sharon, 2015. "Will the next generation of preferential trade and investment agreements undermine prevention of noncommunicable diseases? A prospective policy analysis of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 88-96.
    11. Céline CARRERE & Marcelo OLARREAGA & Damian RAESS, 2017. "Labor Clauses in Trade Agreements: worker protection or protectionism?," Working Papers P200, FERDI.
    12. William Phelan, 2015. "Enforcement and Escape in the Andean Community: Why the Andean Community of Nations is Not a Replica of the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 840-856, July.
    13. Kenta Hirami, 2020. "FTAs in WTO Dispute Settlement," Public Policy Review, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance Japan, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Chad P. Bown, 2017. "Mega-Regional Trade Agreements and the Future of the WTO," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(1), pages 107-112, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dispute Settlement; Regional Trade Agreements; RTAs; Dispute Settlement Mechanisms; WTO Dispute Settlement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International 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:zbw:wtowps:ersd201307. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wtoerch.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.