IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v31y2002i1ps205-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To Settle or Empanel? An Empirical Analysis of Litigation and Settlement at the World Trade Organization

Author

Listed:
  • Guzman, Andrew
  • Simmons, Beth A

Abstract

This paper seeks to understand the factors that cause disputes at the World Trade Organization to move from the negotiation stage to the panel stage. We hypothesize that transfer payments between states are costly to arrange and that the lowest-cost transfers are those that relate directly to the issue in dispute. This implies that when the subject matter of the dispute has an all-or-nothing character and leaves little room for compromise (for example, health and safety regulations), the parties' ability to reach an agreement through the use of transfers is restricted. In contrast, if the subject matter of dispute permits greater flexibility (for example, tariff rates), the parties can more easily structure appropriate transfer payments through adjustments to the disputed variable. We conduct an empirical test of this hypothesis, finding support for it among democratic states. Copyright 2002 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Guzman, Andrew & Simmons, Beth A, 2002. "To Settle or Empanel? An Empirical Analysis of Litigation and Settlement at the World Trade Organization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 205-235, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:31:y:2002:i:1:p:s205-35
    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Serrano Caballero, Enriqueta & Ojo, Marianne, 2019. "Trade Negotiations and Global Relations: Emerging Players and Actors," MPRA Paper 92105, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Thomas A. Zimmermann, 2005. "WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences, and Evaluation," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 60(01), pages 27-61, March.
    3. Anand, Anita & Green, Andrew, 2018. "Securities settlements as examples of crisis-driven regulation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 41-57.
    4. Duy Vu, 2018. "To Settle or to Fight to the End? Case-level Determinants of Early Settlement of Investor-State Disputes," GREDEG Working Papers 2018-36, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Feb 2020.
    5. Jeheung Ryu & Randall W. Stone, 2018. "Plaintiffs by proxy: A firm-level approach to WTO dispute resolution," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 273-308, June.
    6. Emile van Ommeren & Arlo Poletti & Dirk De Bièvre, 2021. "The European Union and the political economy of enforcing international trade rules," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 377-400, September.
    7. Maggi, Giovanni & Staiger, Robert W., 2020. "Learning by ruling and trade disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    8. Antoine Bouet & Jeanne Métivier, 2017. "Is the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure Fair for Developing Countries?," Working Papers hal-02149414, HAL.
    9. Talya Bobick & Alastair Smith, 2013. "The impact of leader turnover on the onset and the resolution of WTO disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 423-445, December.
    10. Bernauer, Thomas & Spilker, Gabriele, 2010. "Escalation dynamics in WTO disputes over environment, health and safety issues," Papers 89, World Trade Institute.
    11. Andrew T. Guzman & Beth A. Simmons, 2005. "Power Plays and Capacity Constraints: The Selection of Defendants in World Trade Organization Disputes," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 557-598, June.
    12. Spilker, Gabriele, 2013. "The WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism – Enforcement, State Power, and Dispute Recurrence," Papers 584, World Trade Institute.
    13. Lee, Jiwon & Wittgenstein, Teresa, 2017. "Weak vs. Strong Ties: Explaining Early Settlement in WTO Disputes," ILE Working Paper Series 7, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    14. Javelosa, Josyline C. & Schmitz, Andrew, 2006. "Costs and Benefits of a WTO Dispute: Philippine Bananas and the Australian Market," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26.
    15. Antoine Bouët & Jeanne Métivier, 2020. "Is the dispute settlement system, “jewel in the WTO’s crown”, beyond reach of developing countries?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(1), pages 1-38, February.
    16. Aydin B. Yildirim & J. Tyson Chatagnier & Arlo Poletti & Dirk De Bièvre, 2018. "The internationalization of production and the politics of compliance in WTO disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 49-75, March.
    17. Barbara Koremenos, 2007. "If Only Half of International Agreements Have Dispute Resolution Provisions, Which Half Needs Explaining?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 189-212, January.
    18. Spilker, Gabriele, 2013. "Compliance with WTO Dispute Rulings," Papers 585, World Trade Institute.
    19. Francesca Parente, 2022. "Settle or litigate? Consequences of institutional design in the Inter-American system of human rights protection," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 39-61, January.
    20. Steven G. Medema, 2020. "The Coase Theorem at Sixty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1045-1128, December.
    21. Julia Gray & Philip Potter, 2020. "Diplomacy and the Settlement of International Trade Disputes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(7-8), pages 1358-1389, August.

    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:ucp:jlstud:v:31:y:2002:i:1:p:s205-35. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.