WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences, and Evaluation

ENGLISH ABSTRACT: On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. During its first ten years, the DSU has since been applied to 324 complaints – more cases than dispute settlement under the GATT 1947 had dealt with in nearly five decades. The system is perceived, both by practitioners and in academic literature, to work generally well. However, it has also revealed some flaws. Negotiations to review and reform the DSU have been taking place since 1997 (“DSU review”), however, without yielding any result so far. In the meantime, WTO Members and adjudicating bodies managed to develop the system further through evolving practice. While this approach may remedy some practical shortcomings of the DSU text, the more profound imbalance between relatively efficient judicial decisionmaking in the WTO (as incorporated in the DSU) and nearly blocked political decisionmaking evolves into a serious challenge to the sustainability of the system. This article provides an overview of the first ten years of DSU practice, the on- going DSU review negotiations, and the challenges to the dispute settlement system. GERMAN ABSTRACT: Am 1. Januar 1995 trat das Übereinkommen über Regeln und Verfahren für die Streitschlichtung (Dispute Settlement Understanding; DSU) als Teil des WTO-Abkommens in Kraft. In den ersten zehn Jahren seines Bestehens fand das DSU auf 324 Klagebegehren Anwendung – mehr Fälle, als unter den Streitschlichtungsregeln des GATT 1947 in dessen nahezu fünfzigjähriger Geschichte behandelt wurden. Die Funktionsweise des Systems wird sowohl in der handelspolitischen Praxis als auch in der wissenschaftlichen Literatur als gut eingestuft. Gleichwohl hat der Mechanismus in seiner Anwendung auch einige Schwächen offenbart. Diese sollen auf dem Verhandlungswege („DSU Review“) behoben werden, doch blieben die seit Ende 1997 laufenden Gespräche bislang erfolglos. Zugleich ist es den Mitgliedstaaten und den Spruchorganen aber stellenweise gelungen, das System im Rahmen der praktischen Anwendung fortzuentwickeln. Während auf diesem Weg einige praktische Probleme des Verfahrenstextes behoben werden konnten, dürfte das beträchtliche Ungleichgewicht in der WTO zwischen einem vergleichsweise effizienten juristischen Entscheidungsmechanismus (in Form des DSU) und den häufig blockierten politischen Entscheidungsmechanismen fortbestehen. Dieses Ungleichgewicht bedroht die Systemnachhaltigkeit. Der vorliegende Artikel gibt einen Überblick über die ersten zehn Jahre DSU-Praxis, die laufenden DSU-Review-Verhandlungen sowie einen Ausblick auf zukünftige Herausforderungen.WTO, Dispute Settlement, DSU Review Negotiations

The Challenge of Reforming the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding

The May 2003 deadline for the completion of the negotiations on improvements and clarifications of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) under the Doha Mandate has not been met. However, Members agreed in July 2003 to extend the deadline for the review until the end of May 2004. This article briefly summarises the past six years of negotiations on the DSU review, the most contentious issues and the systemic difficulties of the negotiations. We conclude with prospects for the forthcoming negotiations until 2004.WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding DSU Review

Gewährleisten umgesetzte WTO-Streitschlichtungsurteile offene Märkte? Eine Betrachtung am Beispiel des Zeitschriftenfalles

Theoretical analyses of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism suggest that the system contains only weak incentives for the implementation of rulings. Against this background, it is puzzling that the specific WTO procedure which deals with allegedly insufficient implementation is used only in about one third of the cases where the need for implementation has arisen. Yet, a closer look at the where implementation has allegedly occurred can partly resolve this puzzle: The defendant government implemented the rulings by modifying or repealing the contemplated measures. At the same time, however, it resorted to alternative measures in order to keep the market closed. Some market opening occurred only after the conclusion of the multilateral procedure within bilateral negotiations and in areas which have not been subject to the multilateral dispute. This leads to the hypothesis that the role of the multilateral dispute settlement system could be less important than is generally accepted today. Note: The downloadable document is in German.Protectionism, WTO Dispute Settlement, Implementation

WTO Dispute Settlement: General Appreciation and the Role of India

ABSTRACT On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. Until August 2006, the DSU has since been applied to 348 complaints – more cases than dispute settlement under the GATT 1947 had dealt with in nearly five decades. The system is perceived, both by practitioners and in academic literature, to work generally well. However, it has also revealed some flaws. Negotiations to review and reform the DSU have been taking place since 1997 ("DSU review"), however, without yielding any result so far. In the meantime, WTO Members and adjudicating bodies managed to develop the system further through evolving practice. While this approach may remedy some practical shortcomings of the DSU text, the more profound imbalance between relatively efficient judicial decision-making in the WTO (as incorporated in the DSU) and nearly blocked political decision-making evolves into a serious challenge to the sustainability of the system. This article provides an overview of the first eleven years of DSU practice and the current DSU review negotiations. An outlook for future challenges to the system is also given. Moreover, specific chapters of the text focus on the role of India in WTO dispute settlement, her use of the system and her participation in the DSU review negotiations. JEL Classification: F02, F13, K33, K41International Trade; Trade Policy; WTO; Dispute Settlement; Dispute Settlement Understanding; DSU Review Negotiations; India

Negotiating the review of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding

ABSTRACT On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. Since 1998, negotiations to review and reform the DSU have taken place (‘DSU review’), without however yielding any result so far. This study proposes to analyse the DSU review negotiations and the proposals submitted so far. In a first step, the foundations for the discussion are laid with a brief account of the economic, legal and political aspects of the dispute settlement mechanism, its evolution and its working in practice. In a second step, the study offers an overview and analysis of the negotiating process in its broader context. Additionally, negotiating proposals on stage-specific and horizontal issues of the dispute settlement mechanism are presented and analysed in depth with regard to their background, their contents and their potential implications. In a third step, the difficulties faced by negotiators in completing the DSU review are explored. Policy recommendations for further negotiations are made and the chances of a future agreement are evaluated. Finally, the study is also intended to offer a one-stop point of departure for other researchers who wish to explore further specific aspects of the DSU review. To this end, references available on the DSU review exercise have been comprehensively documented. JEL Classification: F02, F13, K33, K41WTO; Dispute Settlement; DSU Review Negotiations

An isogeometric finite element formulation for phase transitions on deforming surfaces

This paper presents a general theory and isogeometric finite element implementation for studying mass conserving phase transitions on deforming surfaces. The mathematical problem is governed by two coupled fourth-order nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs) that live on an evolving two-dimensional manifold. For the phase transitions, the PDE is the Cahn-Hilliard equation for curved surfaces, which can be derived from surface mass balance in the framework of irreversible thermodynamics. For the surface deformation, the PDE is the (vector-valued) Kirchhoff-Love thin shell equation. Both PDEs can be efficiently discretized using $C^1$-continuous interpolations without derivative degrees-of-freedom (dofs). Structured NURBS and unstructured spline spaces with pointwise $C^1$-continuity are utilized for these interpolations. The resulting finite element formulation is discretized in time by the generalized-$\alpha$ scheme with adaptive time-stepping, and it is fully linearized within a monolithic Newton-Raphson approach. A curvilinear surface parameterization is used throughout the formulation to admit general surface shapes and deformations. The behavior of the coupled system is illustrated by several numerical examples exhibiting phase transitions on deforming spheres, tori and double-tori.Comment: fixed typos, extended literature review, added clarifying notes to the text, added supplementary movie file

WTO Dispute Settlement: General Appreciation and the Role of India

ABSTRACT On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. Until August 2006, the DSU has since been applied to 348 complaints – more cases than dispute settlement under the GATT 1947 had dealt with in nearly five decades. The system is perceived, both by practitioners and in academic literature, to work generally well. However, it has also revealed some flaws. Negotiations to review and reform the DSU have been taking place since 1997 ("DSU review"), however, without yielding any result so far. In the meantime, WTO Members and adjudicating bodies managed to develop the system further through evolving practice. While this approach may remedy some practical shortcomings of the DSU text, the more profound imbalance between relatively efficient judicial decision-making in the WTO (as incorporated in the DSU) and nearly blocked political decision-making evolves into a serious challenge to the sustainability of the system. This article provides an overview of the first eleven years of DSU practice and the current DSU review negotiations. An outlook for future challenges to the system is also given. Moreover, specific chapters of the text focus on the role of India in WTO dispute settlement, her use of the system and her participation in the DSU review negotiations. JEL Classification: F02, F13, K33, K4

Negotiating the review of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding

ABSTRACT On 1 January 1995, the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) entered into force. Since 1998, negotiations to review and reform the DSU have taken place (‘DSU review’), without however yielding any result so far. This study proposes to analyse the DSU review negotiations and the proposals submitted so far. In a first step, the foundations for the discussion are laid with a brief account of the economic, legal and political aspects of the dispute settlement mechanism, its evolution and its working in practice. In a second step, the study offers an overview and analysis of the negotiating process in its broader context. Additionally, negotiating proposals on stage-specific and horizontal issues of the dispute settlement mechanism are presented and analysed in depth with regard to their background, their contents and their potential implications. In a third step, the difficulties faced by negotiators in completing the DSU review are explored. Policy recommendations for further negotiations are made and the chances of a future agreement are evaluated. Finally, the study is also intended to offer a one-stop point of departure for other researchers who wish to explore further specific aspects of the DSU review. To this end, references available on the DSU review exercise have been comprehensively documented. JEL Classification: F02, F13, K33, K4

Doing Business in Mexico

On 1 July 2001, a far-reaching free trade agreement between the EFTA States and Mexico entered into force. ”Doing Business in Mexico” provides targeted assistance to Swiss Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SME) that wish to tap the potential of Mexico as both an export destination and investment location. This comprehensive guide contains information and advice on market research, market entry, and investment in this fascinating country. Part I introduces the reader to this fascinating country, its long history, its politics and its economy. It becomes clear that Mexico is undergoing a deep transition from a country with one party rule and a closed economy to a pluralist democracy and a major player in the world economy. This situation offers excellent opportunities, provided it is approached appropriately and precautions are taken to minimise risks. Business persons interested in establishing a business relationship with Mexico should take the time to familiarise themselves with the historical and political evolution (Chapter 2) and the economic environment (Chapter 3) of Mexico. Part II focuses on core business aspects: Chapter 4 on market research is conceived as a navigator to help Swiss SME representatives retrieve targeted information. Fortunately, many Mexican institutions, public and private, have invested heavily into their websites: Industry-specific data, business directories or market access information are readily available and constitute a formidable online information resource on the Mexican economy that is only a few mouse clicks away. In Chapter 5, the pros and cons of different market entry modes are discussed, and advice is given with regard to successful partnering in Mexico – probably one of the most important factors for foreign firms in the Mexican market. Chapter 6 contains a guide to exporting, including some technicalities of the export business. We hope that the information contained therein will assist you in getting your goods across the border and into the Mexican market. The information on foreign direct investment (FDI) which is contained in Chapter 7 will be of help to those readers who are contemplating business presence in the Mexican market. It gives an overview of the legal framework, the business climate, favourable investment locations, selected costs and basic administrative processes. Some of these issues are also taken up in Chapter 8 which deals with selected aspects of the legal environment. Finally, Chapter 9 is a wrap-up of Part II, recalling briefly major success factors and challenges when doing business in Mexico. It highlights the importance of ”soft factors” and cultural considerations for successfully dealing with Mexican partners. Part III contains some practical advice for business travellers. Last but not least, Part IV offers information on resources which Swiss SMEs may tap in search of additional assistance or information for their Mexican venture: Chapter 11 offers a vast compilation of selected business contacts and references both in Mexico and Switzerland. The goal is to list institutions which are able to provide targeted assistance and expert advice at all stages of market research, market entry and investment. The list has been put together with the conviction that Swiss SMEs will sooner or later have to rely on local expertise in the market entry process, be it in order to cope with the legal requirements of establishing a business presence or to conduct thorough background checks of potential partners, both of which are necessary for business success. Chapter 12 contains a bibliography with a selection of the literature that I used when writing this book and which may be of help to Swiss SMEs dealing with particular issues. Finally, Chapter 13 concludes with some internet addresses that point to major Mexican media and internet portals with general Mexican content