Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T16:00:20.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Supply of Policy Information in the World Trade Organization: Cross-National Compliance with One-Time and Regular Notification Obligations, 1995–2014

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2019

Jan Karlas
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations and the Peace Research Center Prague, Institute of Political Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University
Michal Parízek*
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations and the Peace Research Center Prague, Institute of Political Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University

Abstract

This text presents the first systematic quantitative descriptive and explanatory account of World Trade Organization (WTO) member states’ compliance with their one-time and regular notification obligations. The system of around 170 notifications, through which states are obliged to provide to the WTO relevant information on their policies, constitutes a key mechanism of transparency in the global trade regime. Based on data for the one-time and regular obligations from the years 1995–2014, we seek to map and explain the variation in the degree to which states comply with these obligations. Descriptively, we identify enormous differences in the compliance values of states, ranging from compliance well above 80% to below 20%. To explain those differences, we test five theoretical explanations that concentrate on the trade policy preferences of states and on their institutional characteristics. The empirical findings support four of the tested explanations. In particular, they highlight the relevance of states’ administrative capacities and membership in international organizations (IOs). In addition, the empirical analysis shows that compliance levels are strongly positively connected with the economic size of the members.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Jan Karlas and Michal Parízek 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Acknowledgments: This research was supported by research grant GA15-12533S ‘Member states in the WTO – preferences, compliance, and monitoring’, from the Czech Science Foundation (GA ČR).

References

Allison, GT (1971) Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. London: Little, Brown & Company.Google Scholar
Baccini, L, Dür, A, and Elsig, M (2015) The Politics of Trade Agreement Design: Revisiting the Depth–Flexibility Nexus. International Studies Quarterly 59, 765775.Google Scholar
Bell, A and Jones, K (2015) Explaining Fixed Effects: Random Effects Modeling of Time-Series Cross-Sectional and Panel Data. Political Science Research and Methods 3, 133153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackhurst, R (1988) Strengthening GATT Surveillance of Trade Related Policies. In Hilf, M and Petersman, E-U (eds.), The New GATT Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Legal and Economic Aspects. The Netherlands: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers.Google Scholar
Boehmer, C and Nordstrom, T (2008) Intergovernmental Organization Memberships: Examining Political Community and the Attributes of International Organizations. International Interactions 34, 282309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, A and Chayes, AH (1993) On Compliance. International Organization 47, 175205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins-Williams, T and Wolfe, R (2010) Transparency as a Trade Policy Tool: The WTO's Cloudy Windows. World Trade Review 9, 551581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forssbaeck, J and Oxelheim, L (2014) The Oxford Handbook of Economic and Institutional Transparency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GATT (1947) General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Available at https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%2055/volume-55-I-814-English.pdf.Google Scholar
GATT (1979) Understanding Regarding Notification, Consultation, Dispute Settlement, and Surveillance. (L/4907), Available at www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/tokyo_notif_e.pdf.Google Scholar
Ghosh, A (2010) Developing countries in the WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism. World Trade Review 9, 419455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handley, K and Limão, N (2012) Trade and Investment under Policy Uncertainty: Theory and Firm Evidence. NBER Working Paper No. 17790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoekman, B and Kostecki, M (2009) The Political Economy of the World Trading System: The WTO and Beyond. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hollyer, JR, Rosendorff, BP, and Vreeland, JR (2011) Democracy and Transparency. The Journal of Politics 73, 11911205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlas, J and Parízek, M (2017) Peer-Reviewing in International Institutions: States’ Activity in WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism. Presented at the 10th Political Economy of International Organizations Conference, 12–14 January 2017, Bern, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Keohane, RO (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Krasner, SD (1976) State Power and the Structure of International Trade. World Politics 28, 317347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laird, S and Valdés, R (2012) The Trade Policy Review Mechanism. In Narlikar, A, Daunton, M, and Stern, RM (eds.), The Oxford Handbook on The World Trade Organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 463484.Google Scholar
Lang, A and Scott, J (2009) The Hidden World of WTO Governance. European Journal of International Law 20(3): 575614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mavroidis, PC (1991) Surveillance Schemes: The GATT's New Trade Policy Review Mechanism. Michigan Journal of International Law 13, 374.Google Scholar
Milner, H (1987) Resisting the Protectionist Temptation: Industry and the Making of Trade Policy in France and the United States during the 1970s. International Organization 41(4): 639665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, RB (1998) Sources of Transparency: Information Systems in International Regimes. International Studies Quarterly 42(1): 109130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pevehouse, JC, Nordstrom, T, and Warnke, K (2004) The COW-2 International Organizations Dataset Version 2.0. Conflict Management and Peace Science 21(2): 101119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plummer, MG and Tafti, A (2014) ‘Transparency in International Trade Policy’, in Forssbaeck, J and Oxelheim, L (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Economic and Institutional Transparency. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 166178.Google Scholar
Polity IV Project (2010) Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2010, Center for Systemic Peace, www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity06.htm (accessed 30 September 2012).Google Scholar
Powell, WW and DiMaggio, PJ (eds.) (1991) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (1st edn), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qureshi, A (1990) The New GATT Trade Policy Review Mechanism: An Exercise in Transparency or Enforcement. Journal of World Trade 23(3): 147160.Google Scholar
Shanks, C, Jacobson, HK, and Kaplan, JH (1996) Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organizations, 1981–1992. International Organization 50(4): 593627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, BA (1997) Who Adjusts?: Domestic Sources of Foreign Economic Policy During the Interwar Years. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wolfe, R (2013) ‘Letting the Sun Shine in at the WTO: How Transparency Brings the Trading System to Life’, World Trade Organization, Staff Working Paper ERSD-2013-03, https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2229741 (accessed 1 September 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, R (2017a) Sunshine over Shanghai: Can the WTO Illuminate the Murky World of Chinese SOEs?. World Trade Review 16(4): 713732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, R (2017b) ‘America is Right about the WTO, but for the Wrong Reasons’, Financial Times, 20 December 2017, www.ft.com/content/ef8598c6-e4ad-11e7-a685-5634466a6915 (accessed 4 March 2018).Google Scholar
World Bank (2015) World DataBank, http://data.worldbank.org/.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (1994) ‘Decision on Notification Procedures’, www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/33-dnotf_e.htm (accessed 3 September 2017).Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2017a) ‘Overview of Development in the International Trading Environment: Annual Report by Director-General (WT/TPR/OV/20), www.wto.org/english/news_e/news17_e/trdev_04dec17_e.pdf (accessed 20 March 2018).Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2017b) ‘Steel Concerns Continue to Dominate Discussions on Anti-Dumping at WTO’, www.wto.org/english/news_e/news16_e/anti_01nov16_e.htm (accessed 13 November 2017).Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2017c) ‘E-Campus WTO: Transparency and the WTO: Notification Obligations’, https://ecampus.wto.org/admin/files/Course_712/Module_3356/ModuleDocuments/Module%203_print.pdf.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2017d) ‘Subsidies – Questions from the United States and the European Union to China Pursuant to Article 25.8 of the Agreement’, Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, G/SCM/Q2/CHN/70.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2017e) ‘Procedures to Enhance the Transparency and Strengthen Notification Requirements under WTO Agreements’, Council for Trade in Goods, JOB/GC/148.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (2018) ‘WTO Glossary: Transparency’, www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/glossary_e/glossary_e.htm (accessed 2 October 2018).Google Scholar
Zürn, M (1997) Assessing State Preferences and Explaining Institutional Choice: The Case of Intra-German Trade. International Studies Quarterly 41(2): 295320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar