Loading…

Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO

Purpose – This paper aims to examine the issues faced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system in disputes involving questions of regulatory convergence. The traditional focus of the WTO has been on increasing market access and eliminating discrimination in trade. Now, as tari...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of international trade law & policy 2015-09, Vol.14 (3), p.157-162
Main Author: Meagher, Niall
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 162
container_issue 3
container_start_page 157
container_title Journal of international trade law & policy
container_volume 14
creator Meagher, Niall
description Purpose – This paper aims to examine the issues faced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system in disputes involving questions of regulatory convergence. The traditional focus of the WTO has been on increasing market access and eliminating discrimination in trade. Now, as tariffs have been all but eliminated and Members rarely impose obviously discriminatory trade barriers, attention increasingly turns to questions of regulatory convergence. Leaving aside questions as to the overall benefits of regulatory convergence between markets, these developments pose a significant challenge to the organs of the WTO dispute settlement – and it is here that this paper focuses. Design/methodology/approach – While General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/WTO law has fairly well-developed tools for identifying discrimination in trade, the tools necessary for assessing whether regulatory measures maintain the requisite balance or proportionality between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns are less clear. The paper discusses this latter point. Findings – The WTO agreements are frequently not clear on where or how this balance between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns is to be determined. To date, WTO panels and the Appellate Body have preferred to focus on whether they can identify any discriminatory aspects of a measure. However, they will increasingly be called to pronounce on non-discriminatory regulatory policy choices of Members. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature on the Appellate Body, and argues that Members will need to develop a credible and consistent balance between policy space and trade restrictiveness.
doi_str_mv 10.1108/JITLP-11-2015-0041
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1108_JITLP_11_2015_0041</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2138052408</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c299t-dcd482ba005d39a5ad1e295057e312fa6f5de3344d603d907afcd51813009cf73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkE1Lw0AQhhdRsFb_gKeA59WZ_Ug2Ryl-VAoVqXhc1uyktqRJ3d0I_fem1ovgaYbhfWaYh7FLhGtEMDdP08XsmSNyAag5gMIjNhKgNFeyyI_ZCFVRDHOhTtlZjGuAXJlcj5h5oWXfuNSFXVZ17ReFJbUVZa71mV_FbZ8oi5RSQxtqU7Zqs_RB2dtifs5OatdEuvitY_Z6f7eYPPLZ_GE6uZ3xSpRl4r7yyoh3B6C9LJ12HkmUGnRBEkXt8lp7klIpn4P0JRSurrxGgxKgrOpCjtnVYe82dJ89xWTXXR_a4aQVKA1oocAMKXFIVaGLMVBtt2G1cWFnEezekP0xNLR2b8juDQ0QHqDht-Aa_z_zx6r8Bl0AZvQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2138052408</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO</title><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>Emerald:Jisc Collections:Emerald Subject Collections HE and FE 2024-2026:Emerald Premier (reading list)</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Meagher, Niall</creator><contributor>James C Hartigan, Petros C Mavroidis, and Joseph McMahon, Profs</contributor><creatorcontrib>Meagher, Niall ; James C Hartigan, Petros C Mavroidis, and Joseph McMahon, Profs</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose – This paper aims to examine the issues faced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system in disputes involving questions of regulatory convergence. The traditional focus of the WTO has been on increasing market access and eliminating discrimination in trade. Now, as tariffs have been all but eliminated and Members rarely impose obviously discriminatory trade barriers, attention increasingly turns to questions of regulatory convergence. Leaving aside questions as to the overall benefits of regulatory convergence between markets, these developments pose a significant challenge to the organs of the WTO dispute settlement – and it is here that this paper focuses. Design/methodology/approach – While General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/WTO law has fairly well-developed tools for identifying discrimination in trade, the tools necessary for assessing whether regulatory measures maintain the requisite balance or proportionality between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns are less clear. The paper discusses this latter point. Findings – The WTO agreements are frequently not clear on where or how this balance between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns is to be determined. To date, WTO panels and the Appellate Body have preferred to focus on whether they can identify any discriminatory aspects of a measure. However, they will increasingly be called to pronounce on non-discriminatory regulatory policy choices of Members. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature on the Appellate Body, and argues that Members will need to develop a credible and consistent balance between policy space and trade restrictiveness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1477-0024</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2045-4376</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/JITLP-11-2015-0041</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Agreements ; Conflict resolution ; Cooperation ; Developing countries ; Discrimination ; Disputes ; GATT ; International business ; International business law ; International trade ; LDCs ; Markets ; Regulation ; Strategy ; Tariffs ; Trade barriers ; Trade policy</subject><ispartof>Journal of international trade law &amp; policy, 2015-09, Vol.14 (3), p.157-162</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2138052408/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2138052408?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,12845,21387,21394,27866,27924,27925,33611,33985,36060,43733,43948,44363,74221,74468,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>James C Hartigan, Petros C Mavroidis, and Joseph McMahon, Profs</contributor><creatorcontrib>Meagher, Niall</creatorcontrib><title>Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO</title><title>Journal of international trade law &amp; policy</title><description>Purpose – This paper aims to examine the issues faced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system in disputes involving questions of regulatory convergence. The traditional focus of the WTO has been on increasing market access and eliminating discrimination in trade. Now, as tariffs have been all but eliminated and Members rarely impose obviously discriminatory trade barriers, attention increasingly turns to questions of regulatory convergence. Leaving aside questions as to the overall benefits of regulatory convergence between markets, these developments pose a significant challenge to the organs of the WTO dispute settlement – and it is here that this paper focuses. Design/methodology/approach – While General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/WTO law has fairly well-developed tools for identifying discrimination in trade, the tools necessary for assessing whether regulatory measures maintain the requisite balance or proportionality between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns are less clear. The paper discusses this latter point. Findings – The WTO agreements are frequently not clear on where or how this balance between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns is to be determined. To date, WTO panels and the Appellate Body have preferred to focus on whether they can identify any discriminatory aspects of a measure. However, they will increasingly be called to pronounce on non-discriminatory regulatory policy choices of Members. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature on the Appellate Body, and argues that Members will need to develop a credible and consistent balance between policy space and trade restrictiveness.</description><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>Conflict resolution</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Developing countries</subject><subject>Discrimination</subject><subject>Disputes</subject><subject>GATT</subject><subject>International business</subject><subject>International business law</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>LDCs</subject><subject>Markets</subject><subject>Regulation</subject><subject>Strategy</subject><subject>Tariffs</subject><subject>Trade barriers</subject><subject>Trade policy</subject><issn>1477-0024</issn><issn>2045-4376</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M2L</sourceid><recordid>eNptkE1Lw0AQhhdRsFb_gKeA59WZ_Ug2Ryl-VAoVqXhc1uyktqRJ3d0I_fem1ovgaYbhfWaYh7FLhGtEMDdP08XsmSNyAag5gMIjNhKgNFeyyI_ZCFVRDHOhTtlZjGuAXJlcj5h5oWXfuNSFXVZ17ReFJbUVZa71mV_FbZ8oi5RSQxtqU7Zqs_RB2dtifs5OatdEuvitY_Z6f7eYPPLZ_GE6uZ3xSpRl4r7yyoh3B6C9LJ12HkmUGnRBEkXt8lp7klIpn4P0JRSurrxGgxKgrOpCjtnVYe82dJ89xWTXXR_a4aQVKA1oocAMKXFIVaGLMVBtt2G1cWFnEezekP0xNLR2b8juDQ0QHqDht-Aa_z_zx6r8Bl0AZvQ</recordid><startdate>20150921</startdate><enddate>20150921</enddate><creator>Meagher, Niall</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150921</creationdate><title>Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO</title><author>Meagher, Niall</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c299t-dcd482ba005d39a5ad1e295057e312fa6f5de3344d603d907afcd51813009cf73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>Conflict resolution</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Developing countries</topic><topic>Discrimination</topic><topic>Disputes</topic><topic>GATT</topic><topic>International business</topic><topic>International business law</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>LDCs</topic><topic>Markets</topic><topic>Regulation</topic><topic>Strategy</topic><topic>Tariffs</topic><topic>Trade barriers</topic><topic>Trade policy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meagher, Niall</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of international trade law &amp; policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meagher, Niall</au><au>James C Hartigan, Petros C Mavroidis, and Joseph McMahon, Profs</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO</atitle><jtitle>Journal of international trade law &amp; policy</jtitle><date>2015-09-21</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>157</spage><epage>162</epage><pages>157-162</pages><issn>1477-0024</issn><eissn>2045-4376</eissn><abstract>Purpose – This paper aims to examine the issues faced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system in disputes involving questions of regulatory convergence. The traditional focus of the WTO has been on increasing market access and eliminating discrimination in trade. Now, as tariffs have been all but eliminated and Members rarely impose obviously discriminatory trade barriers, attention increasingly turns to questions of regulatory convergence. Leaving aside questions as to the overall benefits of regulatory convergence between markets, these developments pose a significant challenge to the organs of the WTO dispute settlement – and it is here that this paper focuses. Design/methodology/approach – While General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/WTO law has fairly well-developed tools for identifying discrimination in trade, the tools necessary for assessing whether regulatory measures maintain the requisite balance or proportionality between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns are less clear. The paper discusses this latter point. Findings – The WTO agreements are frequently not clear on where or how this balance between sovereign/domestic concerns and trade concerns is to be determined. To date, WTO panels and the Appellate Body have preferred to focus on whether they can identify any discriminatory aspects of a measure. However, they will increasingly be called to pronounce on non-discriminatory regulatory policy choices of Members. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature on the Appellate Body, and argues that Members will need to develop a credible and consistent balance between policy space and trade restrictiveness.</abstract><cop>Bingley</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/JITLP-11-2015-0041</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1477-0024
ispartof Journal of international trade law & policy, 2015-09, Vol.14 (3), p.157-162
issn 1477-0024
2045-4376
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1108_JITLP_11_2015_0041
source Social Science Premium Collection; ABI/INFORM Global; Politics Collection; Emerald:Jisc Collections:Emerald Subject Collections HE and FE 2024-2026:Emerald Premier (reading list); PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Agreements
Conflict resolution
Cooperation
Developing countries
Discrimination
Disputes
GATT
International business
International business law
International trade
LDCs
Markets
Regulation
Strategy
Tariffs
Trade barriers
Trade policy
title Regulatory convergence and dispute settlement in the WTO
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T01%3A32%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Regulatory%20convergence%20and%20dispute%20settlement%20in%20the%20WTO&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20international%20trade%20law%20&%20policy&rft.au=Meagher,%20Niall&rft.date=2015-09-21&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=157&rft.epage=162&rft.pages=157-162&rft.issn=1477-0024&rft.eissn=2045-4376&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/JITLP-11-2015-0041&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2138052408%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c299t-dcd482ba005d39a5ad1e295057e312fa6f5de3344d603d907afcd51813009cf73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2138052408&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true