The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The WTO Dispute Settlement System: The First Ten Years
Abstract
This paper reviews the operation of the WTO’s dispute settlement system during its first ten years – from 1995 to 2004. After a brief overview of the system, the experience of several major users of the system – the United States, the European Communities, Canada, Japan, Brazil and India – is examined and an evaluation is made in terms of how they have fared in advancing their major trade policy concerns on a subject matter and a country-by-country basis. Particular attention is paid to certain bilateral relationships, such as that of the United States and the EC. The paper then evaluates the system’s success in settling disputes, in terms of whether disputes have been settled promptly, either through mutually agreed solutions or through implementation of panel/Appellate Body reports. The paper concludes that since its inception in 1995, the system has worked reasonably well in providing a reasonably effective mechanism through which WTO Members are able to resolve disputes, both at the consultation stage and following completion of formal dispute settlement proceedings. The system has not, however, achieved its goal of promptness in many cases.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“It effectively dealt with most of the controversial cases or issues in the GATT system that had led to blocked panel reports (i.e., not adopted for lack of consensus). 5”
From WTO Dispute Settlement: Crown Jewel or Costume Jewelry? (2022) · cites this paper as Davey, W.J. (2005) ' The WTO Dispute Settlement System: The First Decade '
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Items 101–119 of 119
Developing Countries And Economies In Transition
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.00012
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.00015
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.0009
Legitimacy, Coherence And Governance
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.00014
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.0016
Towards Deeper Integration? The ‘Trade And’ Agenda
Hoekman, B. M., & Kostecki, M. M. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199553761.003.00013
L'interprétation par l'organe d'appel de l'OMC à l'aune de l'objectif de sécurité juridique
Cloarec, M. L. L. (2013) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/1edb4314z16b0z47fcz9483za874f9295c37
An Evaluation of the Dispute Settlement System in the World Trade Organization
Chukwunweike, H. N., Etalong, T. A., & Egwuagu, U. B. (2024) · Global Journal of Politics and Law Research · doi:10.37745/gjplr.2013/vol12n56776
Ebrahimi, A. (2025) · The Encyclopedia of Comparative Jurisprudence and Law · doi:10.61838/jecjl.3.1.13
HUKUKİ AÇIDAN İLAVE GÜMRÜK VERGİSİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ
Güzeş, M., Özaydın, Z. S., Durdu, M., & Üstün, Ü. S. (2025) · Erciyes Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi · doi:10.58820/eruhfd.1810175
Trends of Trade Disputes During the WTO RegimePreprint
Abedin, Z., & Tareq, M. A. (2008) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics
Echevarria, Y. D., Chumbes, K. A. Z., Vargas, K. A. M., Morales, J. G. A., Landa, E. R. L., Rodriguez, B. E. O., & Cuaresma, J. R. M. (2026) · Cogent Social Sciences · doi:10.1080/23311886.2026.2637250
Chellaf, A. (2008) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/ed4dea5czda53z4f1fzb49ez4344f7b09841
L'intervention des tierces parties dans le règlement des différends à l'OMC
Nguyen, N. H. (2015) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/07664d60z3a69z42a9zb3e5z0b0d606b45c1
The Ascendancy of Multipolar Global and Regional Institutions
Savic, B. (2026) · Contributions to international relations · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-21745-5_3
Singh, D. K., & Kaushik, G. (2026) · International Journal of Law Management & Humanities · doi:10.63108/ijlmh.13153
Building IPC4D to promote access to essential medicines
Yu, P. K. (2013) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781849804905.00015
Metadata
- Authors
- Davey, W. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Corresponding author
- Davey, William J.
- Venue
- Journal of International Economic Law
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-01-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 17-50
- ISSN
- 1369-3034 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3758
- OpenAlex
- W2045746954
- Cited by
- 112
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 21.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of International Economic Law (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › World Trade Organization Law
- Social Sciences › Law › International Arbitration and Investment Law
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
- Keywords
- WTO dispute settlement, WTO Appellate Body, panel reports, international trade law
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.