Joan Robinson, criticizing false rigor, was fond of saying that "an elephant is hard to define but easy to recognize! " I wonder if this metaphor applies to the issue of "unfairness" in international trade. I say that because I have noticed that many recent posts on

Greg Mankiw is famous (infamous?) for his statements about offshoring back in 2004, when he was Chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors.  At the time, he said: the "offshoring" of U.S. service jobs is only "the latest manifestation of the gains from trade

Today's FT reports that the U.S.-Korea FTA may be held up because of unsatisfactory investment protection provisions: Against a backdrop of rising economic nationalism, the state audit board has called for the purchase [of Korea Exchange Bank by Lone Star, a U.S. company] to be

The Seventh Annual BIICL WTO Conference is coming up on 22-23 May 2007, in London.  It's a great group of participants as always.  The topics are: 1. The GMOs Dispute 2. Compliance and Remedies: Articles 21.5 and 22 DSU 3. Dispute Settlement under FTAs and the

Robert Lawrence of the Kennedy School has a report out with CFR entitled "The United States and the WTO Dispute Settlement System."  From the press release, here are some of his main recommendations.  For the system: Lawrence proposes a series of realistic fixes to bring about a more

A column in the New York Times – about how US judges find academic writings irrelevant – reminded me of a question I have had for some time:  Why is it that WTO panels and the Appellate Body almost never, ever, refer to scholarly writings (and if they do, it is to

There is an interesting article by Alan Beattie in yesterday's FT.  Beattie first observes that dispute settlement is heating up in response to the continued failure to conclude Doha.  He then refers to Robert Lighthizers' complaints about the AB, which we have discussed before.  Then Beattie makes

For a wonderful tour d'horizon of the history of international economic law, albeit through the lens of the AJIL, see Detlev Vagts article at 100 AJIL 769 (October 2006).  Here is the conclusion: Looking back on the relationship between international economic law and the Journal, one wonders why