Words Matter: How WTO Rulings Handle Controversy

Author:

Busch Marc L1,Pelc Krzysztof J2

Affiliation:

1. Georgetown University

2. McGill University

Abstract

Abstract The rulings of internationals courts are often reduced to “who won?,” but much more is at stake. Like other institutions, the World Trade Organization (WTO) offers rulings that balance legal discipline against political constraints. We argue that one way in which the WTO handles politically sensitive issues is by increasing the amount of affect in their rulings. In doing so, judges provide national governments with discursive resources to persuade their domestic audiences of the legitimacy of compliance. To test our expectations, we conduct a text analysis of all rulings rendered by the institution since 1995. Specifically, we find that more politically charged decisions, such as the ones concerning nonfiscal rather than fiscal aspects of national treatment claims, are explained in qualitatively different terms. We also find that, as an issue gets ruled on repeatedly, the amount of affect deployed progressively decreases. In sum, the WTO chooses its words strategically to persuade litigants, and their domestic audiences, of the legitimacy of compliance in politically fraught disputes.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science

Reference46 articles.

1. The Dejudicialization of International Politics?;Abebe,2019

2. Letter to the Chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture;American Farm Bureau Federation,2015

3. How Informative Are Central Bank Minutes?;Apel;Review of Economics,2014

Cited by 25 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Economic nationalism and the home court advantage;Strategic Management Journal;2024-08-08

2. Computational Legal Studies Comes of Age;European Journal of Empirical Legal Studies;2024-05-13

3. Can “Soft” Advice from International Organizations Catalyze Natural Resource Sector Reform?;International Studies Quarterly;2024-03-14

4. The legitimation of international adjudication;Journal of International Dispute Settlement;2024-01-23

5. Exploiting treaty ambiguity: Public health exceptions in the WTO TRIPS agreement;The Review of International Organizations;2024-01-16

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3