The WTO recently released a very
nice interactive map of WTO DSB litigation.
The map shows total numbers of cases filed for each country - as complainant or as respondent, and who
are the parties. The map is at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_maps_e.htm?country_selected=ARM&sense=e.
The map would be a useful addition in the
classroom.
Additionally, the map reminds me of
an article I wrote a bit back where I did a little bit of rough and dirty
comparisons between Canada and the United States (see Reputational Fallacies
in International Law: A Comparative
Review of United States and Canadian Trade Actions, 30 Brooklyn J. Int’l L. 67 (2004),
available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=970087). In that article, and a related book chapter,
I found that that when one took the size of the states’ economies and
participations in the international economy into account, the numbers of
complaints filed by each (for whatever that means – though I offered my views
of what it means), and the numbers of times they were a respondent (for
whatever that means, and once again, I offered my views) - the results were comparable, despite
the different reputations of the two countries.
A quick glance at this map suggests to me that a similar analysis of
other countries would might show such a phenomenon.
Take for example a comparison
between the Untied States, Australia, and New Zealand. According to this map, the United States
has been a complainant in 92 cases, a respondent in 106 cases, and a third
party in 73. The numbers for Australia are respectively 7, 10, and 47 and for
New Zealand
respectively 7, 0, and 27. Interesting. Of course, any real analysis should include many more factors (and my article does
include more). But if one were just to
play with the numbers, if the universe was just those three countries, and
using the figures the Economist has provided for 2008 for their exports and
imports of goods (as a measure of their international economy, I did not have
the numbers for services – sorry), we find that the size of those economies are
(in billion US dollars) for the US, Australia and NZ: 2639, 224.5 and 47.9 or
ratios of roughly 90.6 to 7.7 to 1.6 -
respectively. And yet, their ratios for
acting as a complainant in the WTO are 86 to 6.6 to 6.6 (raw numbers are at the
map). Their ratios for being a
respondent are 91.4 to 8.6 to 0. As a
third party participant they are 49.6 to 32 to 18.4. Do these numbers suggest some sort of
similarity in their trade behaviors?
Perhaps.
But the real fun, for me anyway, is
when one compares countries that are neighbors – with all the psychological
baggage that goes with that (as I did for the US
and Canada). As I am off to Australia next week (to be a visiting
fellow at University of New South Wales, and then will later present a paper in
Wellington, NZ) I though it might be entertaining to compare those two
countries – admittedly in this very rough method. So, just using those two countries, the
relative sizes of their international economies are 82.4 to 17.6. And yet for the ratio of the number of
complaints filed at the WTO, they are 50 to 50, though for being a respondent
100 to 0, and as third party participants 63.5 to 26.5. True, the numbers are small – but do these
ratios suggest anything with respect to their respective reputations (such as
they may be determined) or with their self images? Anyway, a real analysis would involve plenty
more factors, but would likely be just as entertaining.
Just some thoughts sparked by this new cool map.
