Civil Society At The WTO: The Illusion Of Inclusion?

In this brief essay, I want to link our panel\u27s focus on civil society-and related issues of inclusion and participation-with the broader conference theme of international law and organizations as we enter the 21st century

Trade and : Recent Developments in Trade Policy and Scholarship - And Their Surprising Political Implications

Lately, I\u27ve been thinking about the richly suggestive phrase trade and. What does it mean? Is it shorthand for new topics on the expanded trade agenda, such as trade and environment or trade and intellectual property ? Does it describe new movements in legal scholarship on trade issues? How is it similar to, or different from, law and ? Until fairly recently, most scholarship about international trade law fell within a relatively well-defined domain. The substantive focus of this traditional scholarship\u27 typically has been on a series of tradi- tional, core trade issues: tariffs, quotas, most-favored-nation treat- ment, nondiscrimination, permissible safeguards and adjustment actions, and the like.2 Most of the traditional scholarship shares a common set of assumptions rooted in classic liberal economics: that liberalized international trade permits nations and firms to exploit comparative advantages, that voluntary exchanges through trade are mutually beneficial, and that liberalized trade enhances global wel- fare. Traditional scholarship also assumes, either explicitly or implic- itly, the autonomy of international markets. This scholarship typically urges the reduction-or elimination-of government interference, either domestically or internationally, with normal commercial ac- tivity. While much trade scholarship still addresses these issues, today this form of scholarship no longer dominates the field. Indeed, trade scholars today are by necessity trade and scholars. That is, those who write about trade policy can hardly escape study of relationships among trade and numerous topics traditionally considered outside the trade realm, whether they be regulatory heterogeneity, environmental regulation, labor standards or competition law. These and other trade and topics are among the most interesting-and difficult-is- sues on the trade agenda

International Legal Scholarship at the Millennium

The beginning of a new journal is always a moment of great promise and expectation, and the start of The Chicago Journal of International Law is no exception. The decision to launch an international law journal at this time no doubt reflects both a widespread understanding that many problems traditionally considered domestic have important international dimensions, and the increasing prominence and diversity of international legal norms and institutions. In this sense, the start of this journal reflects good news about the state of international law. But there is something disquieting about starting a new international law journal with an inquiry into the problems of international legal scholarship. While it is often useful for an academic discipline to self-consciously examine its own understandings, a Symposium dedicated to this topic may signal an underlying weakness in the discipline. The purpose of this short essay is to explore the unsettling juxtaposition presented by the launch of this journal and its Symposium theme: is there a connection between the good news about international law that prompts the start of this journal, and the bad news about international law scholarship that prompts this specific Symposium

Trade and : Recent Developments in Trade Policy and Scholarship - And Their Surprising Political Implications

Lately, I\u27ve been thinking about the richly suggestive phrase trade and. What does it mean? Is it shorthand for new topics on the expanded trade agenda, such as trade and environment or trade and intellectual property ? Does it describe new movements in legal scholarship on trade issues? How is it similar to, or different from, law and ? Until fairly recently, most scholarship about international trade law fell within a relatively well-defined domain. The substantive focus of this traditional scholarship\u27 typically has been on a series of tradi- tional, core trade issues: tariffs, quotas, most-favored-nation treat- ment, nondiscrimination, permissible safeguards and adjustment actions, and the like.2 Most of the traditional scholarship shares a common set of assumptions rooted in classic liberal economics: that liberalized international trade permits nations and firms to exploit comparative advantages, that voluntary exchanges through trade are mutually beneficial, and that liberalized trade enhances global wel- fare. Traditional scholarship also assumes, either explicitly or implic- itly, the autonomy of international markets. This scholarship typically urges the reduction-or elimination-of government interference, either domestically or internationally, with normal commercial ac- tivity. While much trade scholarship still addresses these issues, today this form of scholarship no longer dominates the field. Indeed, trade scholars today are by necessity trade and scholars. That is, those who write about trade policy can hardly escape study of relationships among trade and numerous topics traditionally considered outside the trade realm, whether they be regulatory heterogeneity, environmental regulation, labor standards or competition law. These and other trade and topics are among the most interesting-and difficult-is- sues on the trade agenda