Search results

Limited participation of least developed countries (LDCs) in the WTO's dispute settlement system has been the focus of intensive debate among WTO scholars, diplomats and, in particular, WTO lawyers. Central to this debate are the major hurdles (financial and political) that LDCs are generally perceived to face in using the existing system of remedies in the WTO system to enforce compliance. Of the two existing compliance enforcement mechanisms, the first – compensation – is often unrealistic because the WTO Member whose measures have been found to be WTO inconsistent has to agree with it; while the second – retaliation (i.e., the suspension of concessions with regard to the non-complying Member) – is a costly and in many ways counter-productive “shooting oneself in the foot” remedy that LDCs in particular can usually ill afford.

This chapter briefly discusses proposals for reform that have been proposed to alleviate these problems. The chapter then reviews two additional instruments that LDCs could pursue to improve their ability to enforce compliance and make the WTO dispute settlement system a more viable instrument: limited use of direct effect; and increased use of the instrument of publicity and public relations, including through civil society. These instruments, whether independently, or in combination with existing mechanisms and other new compliance enforcement measures, could provide useful tools for the WTO's poorest Members to increase the chances for pay-off from WTO litigation and for compliance with WTO law by larger and more powerful trading partners.

The appropriateness of retaliatory trade measures in the World Trade Organization dispute settlement process have increasingly come under scrutiny in recent years. Several Members and commentators alike have recommended large-scale amendments to the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) to provide alternatives to retaliatory measures, with the most notable including compensation, collective retaliation, and increased special and differential treatment for developing countries and/or widespread loss of privileges for non-conforming respondents.

Unfortunately, many of the proposals failed to first identify the aims and objectives of the retaliatory phase, or even of dispute settlement more generally. This chapter takes a more holistic approach in its analysis of whether any of the current proposals will improve (or harm) the system. In doing so, this chapter will first assess the effectiveness and appropriateness of retaliatory trade measures by evaluating the goals and objectives in which it is designed to achieve. It will then evaluate some of the more prominent proposals for amending the DSU under the same framework. Taking such an approach will allow for a more comprehensive review and will reveal not only the problems with retaliatory trade measures, but also its positive aspects, and not only the positive aspects of the suggested alternatives but also where they may be detrimental to the system.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse World Trade Organisation (WTO) remedies from a developing country perspective, with a view to suggest reforms in the system.

WTO members' proposals for reforming WTO remedies and WTO cases are reviewed in order to determine the need for reforms and the nature of reforms to be undertaken.

WTO remedies are unfavourable to developing countries, most of which are unable to utilise them due to their weaker economies as compared to their developed country counterparts. There is no consensus on the nature of reforms to be undertaken. This paper suggests the need to synthesise the current proposals and develop various workable models.

This paper provides proposals which may improve WTO remedies for the benefit of developing countries, thereby not only strengthening the WTO enforcement mechanism but the multilateral trading system as a whole.

This paper aims to analyse two ways in which Chinese workers attempt to resist unjust treatment: exit through quitting and voice via collective action. This is in the context of rapid economic growth, rising economic inequality (Lu and Gao, 2011; Qin et al., 2009; Reed, 2012) and escalating industrial conflict (Pringle, 2011).

A model is developed and hypotheses formulated in the light of qualitative data analysis that included archival data, workplace observation and interviews with employees and managers at a large factory. A mediated chain model was tested based on a survey of 234 semi-skilled and skilled manual workers and 353 service employees employed in the same city in Western China.

Organisational identification and organisational cynicism were found to mediate the relationship between interactional justice and the two outcomes, intention to quit and collective opposition.

The authors’ interpretation of these relationships challenge previous research by showing that social identification is a more powerful explanation than social exchange in accounting for variations in these two outcomes. Implications are drawn for human resource theory and practice.

The paper is prompted by the US–China trade war and its implications for the sustenance of the multilateral trading system. The two rivals resorted to “self-help” without recourse to the World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system, flouting the WTO as an adjudicator in trade disputes. This paper aims to analyze the drawbacks in the settlement system and examines the urgent need for a retroactive remedy.

This paper adopts desk-review and jurisprudential analysis of the relevant rulings of the WTO dispute settlement body. Using desk-review, primary sources such as the relevant domestic legislations invoked by the USA and China to trigger the trade war were discussed and critically analyzed.

This paper finds that the unilateral and protectionist actions that characterize the trade war can be linked to the loss of confidence in WTO remedies to redress members’ retroactive economic losses. This finding is useful in arguing for the incorporation of a retrospective monetary remedy to forestall the reoccurrence of a similar trade war and save the WTO from being dysfunctional.

Although, whether there should be retroactive remedies in the settlement system has been long debated, this paper makes a significant contribution by highlighting why the drawbacks in the settlement system have become so prominent in the context of this trade war. This paper strengthens the urgent need for WTO dispute settlement reform to prevent a reoccurrence of another global distortion of trade.

There exists a tremendous number of studies in strategy and management journals concerning contracting issues between private firms. Those studies are usually grounded in competing theoretical frameworks such as transaction cost economics, the resource-based view of the firm, incentive and agency theories and few others. However, very few studies, especially in those reviews (this is also true to a lesser extent in economic journals), are concerned with the issue of contracting between private firm and government. This is particularly surprising since existing theoretical frameworks qualified to tackle contracting strategies between private firms can also provide insights into issues related to contracting with government.

Satyagraha, as practiced by Mahatma Gandhi, is a technique of action deigned to set in motion a process to achieve lasting peace. It emerged from the realization that violence breeded violence; war fought to end wars and bring peace brought greater and more devastating wars. Satyagraha replaced brute force by soul force, also known as love force through self-suffering with the sole objective of drowsing hatred in the opponent and arousing in him the inherent capacity, even if muted, to love the “enemy.”

The doctrine of Satyagraha is an extension of the rule of family life into the political arena. Gandhi held that family disputes and differences were generally settled according to the “Law of Love.” The injured member had so much regard for the others that he suffered injury for the sake of his principles without retaliating and without anger against those who differed with him. As repressing of anger and self-suffering were difficult processes, he did not dignify trifles into principles, but in all nonessentials readily agreed with the rest of family and thus continued to gain the maximum of peace for himself without distributing that of others. Thus, his action whether he resisted or resigned was always calculated to promote the common welfare of all.

In times such as ours when conflict is the order of the day and the potentials of globalization offers more to fear than to hope. There is an urgent demand for solutions of conflicts by ways which are constructive and not destructive, which Satyagraha fulfill to a great extent.

This paper aims to demonstrate that online complainants’ reactions to a company’s service recovery attempts (webcare) can significantly vary across two different types of dissatisfied customers (“vindictives” vs “constructives”), who have dramatically diverging complaint goal orientations.

Online multi-country survey among 812 adult consumers who recently had a dissatisfying brand experience and turned to a marketer-generated social media site to voice an online complaint for achieving their ultimate complaining goals. Scenario-based online experiment for cross-validating the survey findings.

Results suggest that “vindictive complainants” – driven dominantly by brand-adverse motives – are immune to any form of webcare, while “constructive complainants” – interested in restoring the customer-brand relationship – react more sensitively. For the latter, “no-responses” often trigger detrimental brand-related reactions (e.g. unfavorable brand image), whereas “defensive responses” are likely to stimulate post-webcare negative word-of-mouth.

This research identifies the gains and harms of (un-)desired webcare. By doing so, it not only sheds light on the circumstances when marketers have to fear negative effects (e.g. negative word-of-mouth) but also provides insights into the conditions when such effects are unlikely. While the findings of the cross-sectional survey are validated with an online experiment, findings should be interpreted with care as other complaining contexts should be further investigated.

Marketers have to expect a serious “backfiring effect” from an unexpected source, namely, consumers who were initially benevolent toward the involved brand but who received an inappropriate response.

This research is one of the first research studies that enables marketers to identify situations when webcare is likely to backfire on the brand after a service failure.