IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v23yi3p723-745..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cybersecurity, Technological Neutrality, and International Trade Law

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriele Gagliani

Abstract

There have already been several studies focusing on cybersecurity and international trade but the intersection between the two is multifaceted and can be approached from several viewpoints. This article focuses on cybersecurity and international trade from the specific perspective of technological neutrality. Although technological neutrality is recognized with different degrees of intensity both under World Trade Organization Covered Agreements and free trade agreements in a diverse range of fields (such as trade in services, technical barriers to trade, or intellectual property), its status in international trade law is unclear. In this uncertain context, it is argued here, technological neutrality has the potential of expanding the scope of trade obligations unpredictably. As a result, in the face of pressing cybersecurity concerns, technology-related trade measures risk to constantly violate trade obligations, making the trade-cybersecurity relationship even more complicated. The possibility to clarify the status of technological neutrality and the scope of technology-neutral provisions is chief among the solutions proposed in this article. Additionally, this article suggests for States either to be compensated when a trade-restrictive cybersecurity measure affects them, or to consider adopting a waiver in the field of technology, similar to what has been carried out in other areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriele Gagliani, 0. "Cybersecurity, Technological Neutrality, and International Trade Law," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 723-745.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:23:y::i:3:p:723-745.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiel/jgaa006
    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:23:y::i:3:p:723-745.. 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.