Library Catalog
Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com

Why Adjudicate? : Enforcing Trade Rules in the WTO / Christina L. Davis.

By: Material type: TextTextPublisher: Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, [2012]Copyright date: ©2012Edition: Course BookDescription: 1 online resource (320 p.) : 2 halftones. 4 line illus. 21 tablesContent type:
Media type:
Carrier type:
ISBN:
  • 9780691152769
  • 9781400842513
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • 382.92 23
LOC classification:
  • HF1385 .D38 2017
Other classification:
  • online - DeGruyter
Online resources: Available additional physical forms:
  • Issued also in print.
Contents:
Frontmatter -- Contents -- Figures -- Tables -- Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Domestic Constraints And Active Enforcement -- 3. The Democratic Propensity For Adjudication -- 4. The Litigious State: U.S. Trade Policy -- 5. The Reluctant Litigant: Japanese Trade Policy -- 6. Conflict Management: Evaluating The Effectiveness Of Adjudication -- 7. Level Playing Field? Adjudication By Developing Countries -- 8. Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Index
Summary: The World Trade Organization (WTO) oversees the negotiation and enforcement of formal rules governing international trade. Why do countries choose to adjudicate their trade disputes in the WTO rather than settling their differences on their own? In Why Adjudicate?, Christina Davis investigates the domestic politics behind the filing of WTO complaints and reveals why formal dispute settlement creates better outcomes for governments and their citizens. Davis demonstrates that industry lobbying, legislative demands, and international politics influence which countries and cases appear before the WTO. Democratic checks and balances bias the trade policy process toward public lawsuits and away from informal settlements. Trade officials use legal complaints to manage domestic politics and defend trade interests. WTO dispute settlement enables states and domestic groups to signal resolve more effectively, thereby enhancing the information available to policymakers and reducing the risk of a trade war. Davis establishes her argument with data on trade disputes and landmark cases, including the Boeing-Airbus controversy over aircraft subsidies, disagreement over Chinese intellectual property rights, and Japan's repeated challenges of U.S. steel industry protection. In her analysis of foreign trade barriers against U.S. exports, Davis explains why the United States gains better outcomes for cases taken to formal dispute settlement than for those negotiated. Case studies of Peru and Vietnam show that legal action can also benefit developing countries.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number URL Status Notes Barcode
eBook eBook Biblioteca "Angelicum" Pont. Univ. S.Tommaso d'Aquino Nuvola online online - DeGruyter (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Online access Not for loan (Accesso limitato) Accesso per gli utenti autorizzati / Access for authorized users (dgr)9781400842513

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Figures -- Tables -- Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Domestic Constraints And Active Enforcement -- 3. The Democratic Propensity For Adjudication -- 4. The Litigious State: U.S. Trade Policy -- 5. The Reluctant Litigant: Japanese Trade Policy -- 6. Conflict Management: Evaluating The Effectiveness Of Adjudication -- 7. Level Playing Field? Adjudication By Developing Countries -- 8. Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Index

restricted access online access with authorization star

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec

The World Trade Organization (WTO) oversees the negotiation and enforcement of formal rules governing international trade. Why do countries choose to adjudicate their trade disputes in the WTO rather than settling their differences on their own? In Why Adjudicate?, Christina Davis investigates the domestic politics behind the filing of WTO complaints and reveals why formal dispute settlement creates better outcomes for governments and their citizens. Davis demonstrates that industry lobbying, legislative demands, and international politics influence which countries and cases appear before the WTO. Democratic checks and balances bias the trade policy process toward public lawsuits and away from informal settlements. Trade officials use legal complaints to manage domestic politics and defend trade interests. WTO dispute settlement enables states and domestic groups to signal resolve more effectively, thereby enhancing the information available to policymakers and reducing the risk of a trade war. Davis establishes her argument with data on trade disputes and landmark cases, including the Boeing-Airbus controversy over aircraft subsidies, disagreement over Chinese intellectual property rights, and Japan's repeated challenges of U.S. steel industry protection. In her analysis of foreign trade barriers against U.S. exports, Davis explains why the United States gains better outcomes for cases taken to formal dispute settlement than for those negotiated. Case studies of Peru and Vietnam show that legal action can also benefit developing countries.

Issued also in print.

Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.

In English.

Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 30. Aug 2021)