IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v9y2006i4p989-1016.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Giving Legal Effect to the Results of WTO Trade Negotiations: An Analysis of the Methods of Changing WTO Law

Author

Listed:
  • Hunter Nottage
  • Thomas Sebastian

Abstract

Trade negotiations conducted in the World Trade Organization (WTO) offer the significant benefit that their results can be made legally binding and enforceable through an effective dispute settlement system. If negotiators wish to avail of this benefit, they must follow the correct procedures to give legal effect to their work. This article critically evaluates the main methods of converting the results of WTO trade negotiations, with a particular focus on the ongoing Doha Round, into WTO law. It demonstrates that amendments to the WTO agreements are procedurally cumbersome and have significant limitations. The article therefore analyses several alternative methods including modifications to schedules, decisions of the Ministerial Conference (such as waivers, authoritative interpretations, and Other Decisions), and the incorporation of new agreements into WTO law (whether multilateral, plurilateral, or reference rules accepted through schedules). The choice between these various methods is complicated as each has advantages and disadvantages. By comparing and evaluating the available options, this article aims to assist negotiators and lawyers in making that difficult choice. Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Hunter Nottage & Thomas Sebastian, 2006. "Giving Legal Effect to the Results of WTO Trade Negotiations: An Analysis of the Methods of Changing WTO Law," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 989-1016, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:9:y:2006:i:4:p:989-1016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:9:y:2006:i:4:p:989-1016. 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.