IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v16y2013i3p669-705.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Asian WTO Members Using the WTO DSU 'Effectively'?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Ewing-Chow
  • Alex W. S. Goh
  • Akshay Kolse Patil

Abstract

Compared to the USA, the European Union, Brazil, and Mexico, Asian World Trade Organization (WTO) members initiate fewer disputes relative to their respective stakes in global trade. They are also more likely to manifest a preference for negotiated settlements as respondents. Some have suggested that this is due to an 'Asian culture of non-litigiousness'. This article seeks to explore this explanation as well as the fit of other explanations. We find that none of these explanations alone satisfactorily explain the current situation. We offer instead a combination of some alternative explanations by looking at the capacity to engage in WTO litigation, the domestic legal vetting processes for trade measures, industry sophistication and Asian production networks. The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Ewing-Chow & Alex W. S. Goh & Akshay Kolse Patil, 2013. "Are Asian WTO Members Using the WTO DSU 'Effectively'?," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 669-705, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:669-705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgt023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    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:oup:jieclw:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:669-705. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.