Collaborative Research: The Role of Legal Capacity in WTO Dispute Settlement

合作研究：法律能力在世贸组织争端解决中的作用

• 批准号: 0351078
• 负责人: Gregory Shaffer
• 金额: $ 5.08万
• 依托单位: University of Wisconsin-Madison
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2004
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2004-06-01 至 2006-05-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0351078&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Role; Legal; Capacity

The adjudication regime of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is widely touted as more successful than any such multilateral institution today. According to conventional wisdom, the key is the WTO's legalistic architecture, making it an island of the rule of law in a world of power-oriented economic diplomacy. Proponents argue that, because "right perseveres over might" in WTO dispute proceedings, developing countries face a reasonably level playing field in such trade conflicts. Are poorer countries indeed as likely to participate and prevail in WTO disputes as their wealthier counterparts?Member-states can only take advantage of the WTO's robust "rule of law" if they have adequate legal capacity, defined as the institutional resources required to prepare and prosecute a case. Developing countries lack such capacity, albeit to varying degrees. The PI's hypothesize that, given cases with the same salience and potential, a poorer country will be much less likely to bring a WTO complaint than will a developed country. Likewise, a poorer complainant will be less likely to induce a defendant to liberalize once a suit is filed. Of course, these biases could also trace to power-oriented disadvantages, such as asymmetric dependence on large markets or on donated aid and preference programs. The PI's contend, however, that legal capacity matters even controlling for power-related variables.This proposal will gather new data. The innovation is a reliable list of hundreds of potential disputes never filed as WTO complaints, involving scores of states, using an official source. The PI's also propose to collect original indicators of legal capacity, legal merits, and the salience of each potential dispute, using well-defined operational measures. The project will include a survey of the delegations of all 146 WTO members, supplemented by in-depth elite interviews. The PI's will assess the impact of legal capacity on dispute initiation and outcomes using the new data on "non-cases" along with data on filed complaints developed by the PI's in previously published work.The proposed study innovates by highlighting the requirement for legal capacity in a properly-functioning "rule of law" regime. The literature on international law so far has ignored this fundamental point, despite the revealed importance of such capacity in domestic legal contexts. The project will also provide extraordinary new data on "non-cases," widely considered the "holy grail" of empirical analyses of international institutions. These data will allow scholars to definitively investigate selection biases that may exist in studies limited to formally filed complaints. Such potential bias remains the most important question mark for the rapidly growing body of work on trade disputes. Because the PI's have carefully refined the proposed study's concepts and operational measures in published work using parallel units of observation (formally filed disputes), and because the PI's have built up close contacts with WTO-related organizations and individuals, the project is feasible.The PI's will disseminate the resulting data through various channels, providing the first public data on "non-disputes" in addition to new variables concerning formal complaints. The findings will help broaden the participation of underrepresented groups in WTO lawsuits, shedding light on the efficacy of publicly-sponsored legal aid and training programs designed to help developing countries use the regime's rules more effectively. Finally, the project's findings will help scholars and diplomats alike assess the ramifications of debates in the current round of WTO trade talks (and in other, regional, trade arrangements) over the optimal design of the dispute settlement system.

世界贸易组织（WTO）的裁决制度被广泛认为是当今任何此类多边机构中最成功的。传统观点认为，关键在于WTO的法律架构，这使得它在一个以权力为导向的经济外交世界中成为一个法治孤岛。支持者认为，由于世贸组织争端程序中的“正义压倒强权”，发展中国家在此类贸易冲突中面临着相当公平的竞争环境。贫穷国家真的和富裕国家一样有可能参与并在WTO争端中获胜吗？成员国只有具备足够的法律行为能力（定义为准备和起诉案件所需的制度资源），才能利用WTO强大的“法治”。发展中国家缺乏这种能力，尽管程度不同。PI的假设是，在同样引人注目和潜在的情况下，一个较贫穷的国家将比一个发达国家更不可能向WTO提出申诉。同样，一旦提起诉讼，较贫穷的原告将不太可能诱使被告放宽限制。当然，这些偏见也可以追溯到权力导向的劣势，比如对大市场或捐赠援助和优惠计划的不对称依赖。然而，PI认为，即使控制了与权力相关的变量，法律行为能力也很重要。这项建议将收集新的数据。这一创新之处在于，它利用官方来源，列出了数百项从未作为WTO申诉提交的潜在争端，涉及数十个国家。PI还建议使用明确的操作措施，收集法律行为能力、法律优点和每个潜在争议的显著性等原始指标。该项目将包括对WTO所有146个成员国代表团的调查，并辅以深入的精英访谈。PI将使用关于“非案件”的新数据以及PI在先前发表的工作中开发的已提交投诉数据，评估法律行为能力对争议发起和结果的影响。拟议的研究的创新之处在于强调了在一个运作良好的“法治”制度中对法律行为能力的要求。迄今为止，关于国际法的文献忽略了这一基本要点，尽管这种能力在国内法律环境中显示出重要意义。该项目还将提供关于“非案例”的非凡新数据，这些数据被广泛认为是国际机构实证分析的“圣杯”。这些数据将使学者能够明确地调查可能存在于仅限于正式提交投诉的研究中的选择偏见。对于迅速增长的贸易争端研究机构而言，这种潜在的偏见仍然是最重要的问号。由于PI在已发表的作品中使用平行观察单位（正式提交的争议）仔细完善了拟议研究的概念和操作措施，并且PI与wto相关组织和个人建立了密切联系，因此该项目是可行的。PI将通过各种渠道传播所得数据，除了关于正式申诉的新变数外，还将提供关于“无争端”的第一批公开数据。调查结果将有助于扩大代表性不足的群体在WTO诉讼中的参与，揭示旨在帮助发展中国家更有效地利用WTO规则的公共资助的法律援助和培训项目的效果。最后，该项目的研究结果将有助于学者和外交官评估当前一轮世贸组织贸易谈判（以及其他区域贸易安排）中关于争端解决机制最佳设计的辩论的后果。