WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MECHANISMS IN THE CONTEXT OF INCREASING ASYMMETRY IN GLOBAL TRADE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15330/apred.1.21.148-160Keywords:
trade disputes, WTO, asymmetric development, international trade, trade and economic agreementsAbstract
This article examines current trends in the resolution of interstate trade disputes through the mechanisms of the World Trade Organization, with an emphasis on identifying the key factors influencing their effectiveness.
To study this issue, a set of methods was used, in particular: statistical method, comparative analysis, elements of the institutionalist approach.
The study reveals that asymmetries in international trade are deepening, while the effectiveness of WTO mechanisms in resolving disputes among member states is declining. As global trade governance instruments weaken, alternative approaches to dispute resolution are increasingly emerging. The rise of economic nationalism among member states as a regulatory norm exacerbates trade conflicts. Countries with limited economic power, often engaging in trade with stronger partners, are particularly dependent on effective protection mechanisms for their interests.
Sectoral analysis of trade disputes for 2023–2025 highlights growing tensions in areas such as domestic market protection, environmental regulation, and state support for strategic industries. Disputes have intensified in sectors including electric vehicles, agricultural products, and new tariff regimes, indicating a shift in the focus of trade conflicts and posing new challenges for the WTO dispute settlement system.
The theoretical value of the study lies in synthesizing current developments in WTO dispute resolution and assessing how global processes affect this institutional mechanism. The findings contribute to the broader understanding of international trade policy evolution and may serve as a basis for refining theoretical approaches to global trade in the context of widening development asymmetries among WTO members.
The study's practical significance stems from its potential to inform improvements in mechanisms for protecting national trade interests. Further research should explore the effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution methods outside the WTO, particularly in the context of asymmetric regional trade agreements and digital trade, which present emerging challenges for global trade governance.
References
Chad, P. Bown. “Trump's trade war timeline 2.0: An up-to-date guide”. Peterson Institute for International Economics, www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2025/trumps-trade-war-timeline-20-date-guide Accessed 12 Apr.. 2025
Huzhva, I. “The mechanism for resolving trade disputes in the WTO: theoretical aspects and modern practice in Ukraine and the world.” Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanitarian University, 2015, no 13, p. 8-13.
Kaluzhna, N., and V.Lezhepiokova. “The WTO dispute settlement mechanism.” Foreign Trade: Economics, Finance, Law, 2019, no 4, p. 5-16.
Mazaraki, N., and Yu. Honcharova. “The activities of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body: overcoming inconsistencies.” Foreign Trade: Economics, Finance, Law, 2020, no 1, p. 5-13.
Safarli, K. Yu. “On some aspects of WTO jurisprudence and the dispute settlement mechanism.” Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University, 2024, no 83(3), p. 439-445.
Sidliar, V. “The role of the World Trade Organization in counteracting the rise of protectionism during the COVID-19 pandemic.” World of Finance, 2021, no 1, p. 64-76.
Tishchenko, Yu. “WTO agreements: methods of interpretation.” Foreign Trade: Economics, Finance, Law, 2021, no 4, p. 17-25.
Kalyuzhna, N., and L. Kudyrko. “Effectiveness of trade and economic integration of asymmetric countries: Assessment methods and tools”. Journal of Economy and Technology, 2023, no 1, р. 119-126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ject.2023.11.003
Wang, H. “New Trends in the Great Power Game in Central and Eastern Europe: Challenges and Opportunities for China-CEEC Cooperation.” Global Review, 2022, no 14 (02), р. 78–98, https://doi.org/10.13851/j.cnki.gjzw.202202005.
Tung, N. “From former foes to friends: strategic adjustment in America's security policy toward Vietnam and the influence of the China factor”. The Pacific Review, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2142273
Zuokui, L. “The role of Central and Eastern Europe in the building of silk road economic belt”. Medjunarodni problemi, 2015, no 67, р. 184-195, https://doi.org/10.2298/MEDJP1503184Z
Cooper, A. & Schulz, C.-A. “How secondary states can take advantage of networks in world politics: the case of bridges and hubs”. Globalizations, 2023, р. 1-19, https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2023.2190701
Yatsenko, O. M., and D. S.Uskova. “Ukraine’s experience in resolving international trade and economic disputes within the WTO”. Bulletin of KhNAU, 2019, no 3, p. 193-206.
Dispute settlement activity. WTO, www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispustats_e.htm. Accessed 12 Apr.. 2025.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 4.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
