Ucl Department of Political Science School of Public Policy
نویسنده
چکیده
This study uses quantitative analyses of the complete history of rulings made by the Panels and the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organisation’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism in order to assess the robustness of theories regarding the decision-making of these institutions, as well as to explore the potential for such studies of the WTO at this early stage of its development. Regression analyses are conducted to test for correlation between the success of Complainants in dispute settlement and a variety of factors, representing the hypothesised capacity of states to influence Panels and the Appellate Body through dimensions of political and economic power, the impact of the relative practical capacities of states in dispute settlement proceedings, and the formation of coalitions of states in support of a particular Complainant or Respondent. The data sets produced are also used to derive a number of observations about the performance of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism during its first ten years of operation. The regression analyses produce few significant trends, a result which supports claims that the judicial institutions of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism are independent from Member State interests. The one reliable correlation found in these analyses demonstrates that a Complainant state does have substantial advantage in Panel proceedings if it has previously participated in more disputes than the Respondent. Two other apparent results are that larger coalitions reduce success at the Panel stage, and that the most powerful states are less likely to prevail at the Appellate Body stage, although these results are undermined by the necessarily restricted nature of the model, and are considered to be potentially flawed.
منابع مشابه
Why and How Political Science Can Contribute to Public Health? Proposals for Collaborative Research Avenues
Written by a group of political science researchers, this commentary focuses on the contributions of political science to public health and proposes research avenues to increase those contributions. Despite progress, the links between researchers from these two fields develop only slowly. Divergences between the approach of political science to public policy and the expectations that public hea...
متن کاملThe Coevolution of Networks and Political Attitudes
The Coevolution of Networks and Political Attitudes David Lazer a b , Brian Rubineau c , Carol Chetkovich d , Nancy Katz & Michael Neblo e a Department of Political Science, Northeastern University b Visiting Scholar, Harvard University c IRL School Department of Organizational Behavior, Cornell University d Public Policy Program, Mills College e Department of Political Science, The Ohio State ...
متن کاملHealth Policy and Management: In Praise of Political Science; Comment on “On Health Policy and Management (HPAM): Mind the Theory-Policy Practice Gap”
Health systems have entered a third era embracing whole systems thinking and posing complex policy and management challenges. Understanding how such systems work and agreeing what needs to be put in place to enable them to undergo effective and sustainable change are more pressing issues than ever for policy-makers. The theory-policy-practice-gap and its four dimensions, as articulated by Chini...
متن کاملA New Approach to Public Policy Studies Relying on the Theory of Critical Discourse Analysis Studies the State as a Discourse
Understanding the policy cycle, as well as scrutinizing the text of hidden and obvious policies and rules, requires a model of discourse analysis based on which discursive ap-proaches of policy makers are understood and estimated. However, when it comes to presenting a policy model, we have to use the views of policy theorists to see how a problem as a "public goods" can be found in the policy ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2006