The Persistent Puzzles of Safeguards: Lessons From the Steel Dispute

Sykes, A. O.

doi:10.1093/jiel/7.3.523

Cited by 14 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 154 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sykes (2003, 2004) and Grossman and Sykes (2007) have argued that the Appellate Body has made it very difficult for countries to apply safeguards by utilizing the language in Article XIX GATT in reviewing challenged safeguards without clarifying the meaning of the key terms. Particularly problematic has been the insistence on applying the ‘unforeseen developments’ test to safeguard actions.…”

Section: Implications Of the Decision For Wto Case Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

US–Tyres: Upholding a WTO Accession Contract – Imposing Pain for Little Gain

Charnovitz

Hoekman

2013

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2009, the United States imposed additional tariffs for a three-year period on imports of automotive tires from China under a special-safeguard provision included in China's Protocol of Accession to the WTO. China challenged the measure in the WTO. The case marked the first WTO dispute in which a challenged safeguard was upheld by the Appellate Body; the first in which an accession protocol was used successfully as a defense; and the first that China lost as a complaining party. It also was noteworthy in that the safeguard was sought by a labor union, not the domestic industry. This paper reviews the WTO Appellate Body's findings and discusses a number of the legal and policy implications regarding China's Accession Protocol, the Safeguards Agreement, and WTO accession law, as well as economic aspects of the case.

show abstract

Section: Implications Of the Decision For Wto Case Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

US–Tyres: Upholding a WTO Accession Contract – Imposing Pain for Little Gain

Charnovitz

Hoekman

2013

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our critique in this regard draws heavily on our prior work, along with the work of other American Law Institute (ALI) reporters. See Horn and Mavroidis (2003); Sykes (2003Sykes ( , 2004; Grossman and Mavroidis (2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS259; WT/DS252; WT/DS248; WT/DS249; WT/DS251; WT/DS258; WT/DS254; WT/DS253: DSR 2003:VII, 3117)

Grossman¹

2006

The WTO Case Law of 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why Are Safeguards Needed in a Trade Agreement?

Crowley

Dunoff²

2009

Law and Economics of Contingent Protection in International Trade

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on the use of safeguards in a trade agreement. It then analyzes the available data on the use of safeguards by WTO members to examine two hypotheses in the economics literature, that safeguards improve welfare by facilitating tariff reductions and that safeguards improve welfare by providing insurance against adverse economic shocks. I find that countries which undertook larger tariff reductions during the Uruguay Round conducted more safeguards investigations after the WTO was established. This suggests that the presence of a safeguard clause in the WTO agreement may have facilitated greater tariff reductions during the Uruguay Round. I find no evidence that safeguards are used more intensively by countries exposed to more aggregate economic uncertainty. It thus seems unlikely that safeguards provide insurance against aggregate economic shocks.

show abstract

The Persistent Puzzles of Safeguards: Lessons From the Steel Dispute

Cited by 14 publications

References 154 publications

US–Tyres: Upholding a WTO Accession Contract – Imposing Pain for Little Gain

US–Tyres: Upholding a WTO Accession Contract – Imposing Pain for Little Gain

United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS259; WT/DS252; WT/DS248; WT/DS249; WT/DS251; WT/DS258; WT/DS254; WT/DS253: DSR 2003:VII, 3117)

Why Are Safeguards Needed in a Trade Agreement?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About