IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2020-53.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reforming WTO Conflict Management. Why and How to Improve the Use of “Specific Trade Concerns”

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Wolfe

Abstract

With its dispute settlement system in peril, the role of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in mitigating commercial conflict is more important than ever, but its working practices need reform, notably procedures for discussing trade concerns. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) committees have developed a mechanism for representatives to raise “specific trade concerns” (STCs) about laws, regulations, or practices by their trading partners. These can mitigate sources of friction and help avoid recourse to formal dispute settlement. This article assesses experience with STCs and assesses suggestions for reform of the process and its extension to all WTO committees. The important WTO reform question is whether procedural changes in Geneva can make STCs more effective for all members while facilitating enhanced participation by members who do not now make full use of the possibilities that such procedures offer.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Wolfe, 2020. "Reforming WTO Conflict Management. Why and How to Improve the Use of “Specific Trade Concerns”," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/53, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2020/53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/67970/RSCAS_2020_53.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/67970
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fontagné, Lionel & Orefice, Gianluca & Piermartini, Roberta & Rocha, Nadia, 2015. "Product standards and margins of trade: Firm-level evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 29-44.
    2. Lionel Fontagné & Gianluca Orefice & Roberta Piermartini & Nadia Rocha, 2015. "Product Standards and Margins of Trade: Firm-Level Evidence Product Standards and Margins of Trade: Firm-Level Evidence," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01299757, HAL.
    3. Johannesson, Louise & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2017. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2015: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," Working Paper Series 1148, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    4. repec:hal:pseose:hal-01299757 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Matthew S. Johnson, 2020. "Regulation by Shaming: Deterrence Effects of Publicizing Violations of Workplace Safety and Health Laws," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(6), pages 1866-1904, June.
    6. Matteo Fiorini & Bernard Hoekman & Petros Mavroidis, Maarja Saluste and Robert Wolfe, 2019. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Appellate Body Crisis: Insider Perceptions and Members’ Revealed Preferences," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/95, European University Institute.
    7. Giorgio Barba Navaretti & Lionel Fontagné & Gianluca Orefice & Giovanni Pica & Anna Cecilia Rosso, 2024. "TBTs, firm organization and labor structure," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 958-992, August.
    8. Giorgio Barba Navaretti & Lionel Fontagné & Gianluca Orefice & Giovanni Pica & Anna Cecilia Rosso, 2019. "TBTs, Firm Organization and Labour Structure- The effect of Technical Barriers to Trade on Skills," Working Papers hal-02296142, HAL.
    9. Busch, Marc L. & Reinhardt, Eric & Shaffer, Gregory, 2009. "Does legal capacity matter? A survey of WTO Members," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 559-577, October.
    10. Pramila Crivelli & Jasmin Groeschl, 2016. "The Impact of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures on Market Entry and Trade Flows," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 444-473, March.
    11. Aydin B. Yildirim & Arlo Poletti & J. Tyson Chatagnier & Dirk De Bièvre, 2018. "The Globalization of Production and the Politics of Dispute Initiation at the World Trade Organization," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 9(S2), pages 38-48, October.
    12. Karttunen,Marianna B., 2020. "Transparency in the WTO SPS and TBT Agreements," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108486453, January.
    13. Antoine Bouet & Jeanne Métivier, 2017. "Is the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedure Fair for Developing Countries?," Working Papers hal-02149414, HAL.
    14. Véronique Fraser, 2012. "Horizontal Mechanism Proposal for the Resolution of Non-Tariff Barrier Disputes at the WTO: An Analysis," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 1033-1073, December.
    15. Jan Karlas & Michal Parízek, 2019. "The Process Performance of the WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism: Peer‐Reviewing Reconsidered," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(3), pages 376-384, September.
    16. Gregory Shaffer & Robert Wolfe & Vinhcent Le, 2015. "Can Informal Law Discipline Subsidies?," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 711-741.
    17. Robert Wolfe, 2020. "Informal Learning and WTO Renewal. Using Thematic Sessions to Create More Opportunities for Dialogue," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/51, European University Institute.
    18. Diana Panke, 2017. "Speech is silver, silence is golden? Examining state activity in international negotiations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 121-146, March.
    19. Wolfe, Robert, 2013. "Letting the sun shine in at the WTO: How transparency brings the trading system to life," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2013-03, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    20. Holzer, Kateryna, 2018. "Addressing tensions and avoiding disputes: Specific trade concerns in the TBT Committee," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2018-11, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    21. 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.
    22. Matteo Fiorini & Bernard Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Douglas Nelson & Robert Wolfe, 2021. "Stakeholder Preferences and Priorities for the Next WTO Director General," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S3), pages 13-22, April.
    23. Robert Wolfe, 2015. "An Anatomy of Accountability at the WTO," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 6(1), pages 13-23, February.
    24. Horn, Henrik & Mavroides, Petros C. & Wijkström, Erik N., 2013. "In the Shadow of the DSU: Addressing Specific Trade Concerns in the WTO SPS and TBT Committees," Working Paper Series 960, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    25. Louise Johannesson & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2016. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2016: A Data Set and its Descriptive Statistics," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/72, European University Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. John Beghin & Jill O’Donnell, 2021. "Trade Agreements in the Last 20 Years: Retrospect and Prospect for Agriculture," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(3), pages 63-68, December.
    2. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Douglas R. Nelson, 2023. "Geopolitical competition, globalisation and WTO reform," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(5), pages 1163-1188, May.
    3. Matteo Fiorini & Bernard Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Douglas Nelson & Robert Wolfe, 2021. "Stakeholder Preferences and Priorities for the Next WTO Director General," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S3), pages 13-22, April.
    4. Bernard Hoekman & Charles Sabel, 2021. "Plurilateral Cooperation as an Alternative to Trade Agreements: Innovating One Domain at a Time," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S3), pages 49-60, April.
    5. Robert Wolfe, 2021. "Informal Learning and WTO Renewal: Using Thematic Sessions to Create More Opportunities for Dialogue," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S3), pages 30-40, April.
    6. Bernard Hoekman & Robert Wolfe, 2021. "Reforming the World Trade Organization: Practitioner Perspectives from China, the EU, and the US," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 29(4), pages 1-34, July.
    7. Jackson, Lee Ann & Maggi, Federica & Piermartini, Roberta & Rubínová, Stela, 2020. "The value of the Committee on Agriculture: Mapping Q&As to trade flows," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2020-15, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    8. Bernard Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2021. "WTO Reform: Back to the Past to Build for the Future," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S3), pages 5-12, April.
    9. Bernard Hoekman & Robert Wolfe, 2021. "WTO Reform As a Triangular Problem among China, the EU and the US," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 22(02), pages 12-16, March.
    10. Robert Wolfe, 2020. "Informal Learning and WTO Renewal. Using Thematic Sessions to Create More Opportunities for Dialogue," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/51, European University Institute.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leonardi, Marco & Meschi, Elena, 2021. "Do Non-tariff Barriers to Trade Save American Jobs and Wages?," IZA Discussion Papers 14162, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Possada, Kian Cássehgari & Ganne, Emmanuelle & Piermartini, Roberta, 2022. "The Role of WTO Committees through the Lens of Specific Trade Concerns Raised in the TBT Committee," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 411-431, October.
    3. Giorgio Barba Navaretti & Lionel Fontagné & Gianluca Orefice & Giovanni Pica & Anna Cecilia Rosso, 2024. "TBTs, firm organization and labor structure," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 958-992, August.
    4. Tao, Hongjun & Luckstead, Jeff & Zhao, Liang & Xie, Chaoping, 2016. "Estimating Restrictiveness of SPS Measures for China's Dairy Imports," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(B), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Kan Yue, 2022. "Non‐tariff measures, product quality and import demand," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(2), pages 870-900, April.
    6. Cali,Massimiliano & Ghose,Devaki & Montfaucon,Angella Faith Lapukeni & Ruta,Michele, 2022. "Trade Policy and Exporters’ Resilience : Evidence from Indonesia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10068, The World Bank.
    7. Nabeshima, Kaoru & Obashi, Ayako & Kim, Kunhyui, 2021. "Impacts of additional compliance requirements of regulations on the margins of trade," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    8. Grant, Jason & Arita, Shawn, 2017. "Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary Measures: Assessment, Measurement, and Impact," Commissioned Papers 259417, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    9. Grundke, Robert & Moser, Christoph, 2019. "Hidden protectionism? Evidence from non-tariff barriers to trade in the United States," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 143-157.
    10. Bossoma Doriane N’DOUA, 2022. "The Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures on Trade in the Forest-Wood-Paper Sector," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2022-01, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    11. Shuyao Yang, 2020. "Technical Barriers to Trade and Firms' Export Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 8693, CESifo.
    12. Xiaodan Hu & Yunhua Tian & Yanping Zhou & Lu Feng, 2021. "How Do China's Importing Firms Respond to Non‐tariff Measures?," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 29(4), pages 89-112, July.
    13. Tamminen, Saara & Niemi, Janne & Nilsson Hakkala, Katariina, 2017. "The expected economic impacts of the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement in Finland," Research Reports 187, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2020. "To AB or Not to AB? Dispute Settlement in WTO Reform," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/34, European University Institute.
    15. Bossoma Doriane N'Doua, 2022. "The Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures on Trade in the Forest-Wood-Paper Sector," Working Papers hal-03573168, HAL.
    16. Kjersti Nes & K. Aleks Schaefer, 2022. "Retaliatory use of public standards in trade," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 142-161, January.
    17. Eyal RONEN, 2017. "Quantifying the trade effects of NTMs: A review of the empirical literature," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 263-274, September.
    18. Gianluca Orefice, 2017. "Non-Tariff Measures, Specific Trade Concerns and Tariff Reduction," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(9), pages 1807-1835, September.
    19. Matteo Fiorini & Bernard Hoekman & Petros Mavroidis, Maarja Saluste and Robert Wolfe, 2019. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Appellate Body Crisis: Insider Perceptions and Members’ Revealed Preferences," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/95, European University Institute.
    20. Macedoni, Luca & Weinberger, Ariel, 2022. "Quality heterogeneity and misallocation: The welfare benefits of raising your standards," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade conflict; dispute settlement; transparency; international trade cooperation; WTO reform;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rsc:rsceui:2020/53. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    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.