Rev Int Organ (2010) 5:497–499 DOI 10.1007/s11558-010-9083-4

Chad P. Bown. 2009. Self-Enforcing Trade: Developing Countries and WTO Dispute Settlement (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press) Soo Yeon Kim

Published online: 21 May 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

In Self-Enforcing Trade: Developing Countries and WTO Dispute Settlement, Chad Bown delineates the many complexities of developing country participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO), from the multilateral trade negotiations for reducing commercial barriers to the “self-enforcement” mechanism of the global trade regime. As the WTO does not itself initiate or prosecute cases of violations but provides the neutral forum for the arbitration of trade disputes among its members, the rules of trade codified in the WTO’s agreements are “self-enforcing,” and it is incumbent on the member countries and affected firms to actively pursue their rights under the WTO agreements through legal recourse to the process under the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU). A consistent theme of the book, and one that would find wide agreement in the literature, is that developing countries face significant challenges in their ability to self-enforce market access commitments made by WTO members. Absent self-enforcement, Bown argues, enforcement is not possible and thus the benefits offered by the rules-based WTO agreements remain out of reach for the world’s poorer trading states. The book thus emphasizes this linkage between the WTO agreements and the self-enforcement needs of developing countries. It identifies the systemic weaknesses of the WTO’s dispute settlement process that make it difficult for firms and policymakers in developing countries to fully engage this process. The main obstacle, Bown contends, is the cost of self-enforcement, which determines the ease with which developing country governments and firms can navigate the legal labyrinth of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. The central finding of this book is that developing countries lack the information necessary to identify WTO-inconsistent trade policies in other member countries and to self-enforce the latter’s WTO commitments. As information gathering requires technical information from economic analysis, legal knowledge of WTO agreements, and political analysis of compliance and reform in other WTO S. Y. Kim (*) Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland, 3140 Tydings Hall, College Park, MD 20742, USA e-mail: [email protected]

498

S.Y. Kim

members, it imposes a heavy cost on developing countries and their firms in undertaking litigation proceedings under the DSU. Moreover, information gathering also constitutes the first two stages of the extended litigation process (ELP), Bown’s six-stage model of dispute settlement in the WTO, thus posing a significant obstacle for the self-enforcement interests of developing countries from the very outset. Intergovernmental organizations such as the Advisory Centre on WTO Law (ACWL) may provide effective legal counsel in the prosecution of cases, and nongovernmental organizations such as Oxfam, among others, may assist domestic firms in organizing politically to lobby their governments. However, Bown argues, both are constrained by the services they cannot offer, namely the gathering of information in the earliest stage of the litigation process. To remedy this gap in the institutional support available to developing countries, Bown proposes the creation of the Institute for Assessing WTO Commitments (IAWC), whose main function would be to maintain a database of WTO violations, thus mitigating the costs of information for developing countries. Among the many strengths of Bown’s extensive study, perhaps the most significant is the insight it offers on participants other than governments in the WTO’s dispute settlement process. Bown’s analysis of firm-level participation in WTO disputes is a valuable contribution to the existing literature, providing a closer look into the political economy of disputes as firms in developing countries negotiate the costs of information, political mobilization and lobbying vis-à-vis their governments. In Bown’s exposition of the six-stage extended litigation process (ELP) model, firms from developing countries such as the Rahimafrooz Batteries of Bangladesh, the Mohsin Match Factory of Pakistan, the Tubac steel company from Guatemala, and Indonesia’s April Fine pulp and paper company are given due recognition as the private economic actors that must mobilize to lobby their governments for redress when foreign governments adopt WTO-illegal policies that affect market access for exporting firms in other countries. Bown’s analysis also highlights the role of supporting actors in developing country participation in the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism, namely the Advisory Centre on WTO Law (ACWL), a group of fewer than ten lawyers that has participated in more than twenty-five disputes since 2001. An intergovernmental organization (IGO) established to provide subsidized, low-cost legal support for developing countries when they are complainants, respondents, or third-parties in WTO disputes, the ACWL acts as an effective legal counsel for firms to facilitate the development and prosecution of legal cases (Step 4 of the ELP). Bown also directs attention to the effectiveness of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in helping domestic firms organize politically to lobby their governments. Amidst a body of scholarship largely devoted to the analysis of government behavior in WTO disputes, Bown’s study provides promising avenues for further research into the role of IGOs and NGOs in the WTO’s dispute settlement process. As for Bown’s proposal for the creation of the Institute for Assessing WTO Commitments (IAWC), the prospects for success from creating such an institution may be gauged by the performance of a recently created, and rather similar, institution: the Global Trade Alert (GTA) initiative, available at www.globaltradealert.org. Launched in 2009 in the wake of the global economic crisis, the GTA is coordinated by the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) and draws on the expertise of

Chad P. Bown. 2009. Self-Enforcing Trade: Developing Countries...

499

seven independent research institutions from around the globe. The GTA provides real-time information on trade policy measures adopted by states during the current economic crisis, identifying not only WTO-inconsistent trade policies but also the states likely to be affected by them. This initiative, as well as the extensive userfriendly database provided through this initiative, bears a striking resemblance to the contours of Bown’s own proposal. What would be most interesting to see is to what extent developing countries, and their firms, make greater use of this information provided by the GTA to pursue more effectively their self-enforcement interests in the WTO. Self-Enforcing Trade: Developing Countries and WTO Dispute Settlement provides an insightful study of the role of developing countries in the WTO’s dispute settlement process. Bown’s ELP model provides a clear analytical framework for identifying the major stages of dispute settlement in the WTO as well as the market failures relevant to each stage. In doing so, the analysis identifies the critical gap—insufficient information—in the resources and assistance available for developing countries undertaking self-enforcement through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. In offering an extensive survey of the countries, issues, and sectors at the center of disputes, Bown puts the economics, law, and politics of WTO disputes within the broader context of developing country participation and encourages a greater engagement of the long-standing question to which there have been few effective answers: how best can the global trade regime affect the participation of developing countries? This most recent installment of Bown’s substantial scholarship on the subject continues to provide theoretical insights, practical solutions, and directions for future research, and the book should make a valuable reference for scholars and policymakers alike.