In terms of activity in lodging complaints with the WTO Court (the agency through which WTO members resolve their disputes), Russia has not advanced beyond South Africa. The United States and EU countries are currently the leaders in terms of WTO disputes. The low level of activity on Russia’s side is primarily due to its relatively recent membership in the organization.
However, WTO membership does not itself automatically lead to activity in this area, or indeed to victories in trade disputes. Certain conditions have to be met for that. As the research by Anastasia and Anton Kazun indicates, deciding factors in success include having a strong economy and the presence of democratic mechanisms that ensure business access to dispute procedures. Their research was presented in the report ‘A Network Analysis of WTO Disputes: Asymmetry in Developing and Developed Countries’ Opportunities, and Russia’s Place in the Trade Club.’
This research used data from 499 disputes referred to the WTO Court since its founding in 1995. The researchers excluded cases from 2015 which have not yet been fully resolved. While working on this project, the researchers compiled a list of the WTO’s top-10 countries involved in disputes. Their results indicated it is the United States and EU that are most commonly found listed as plaintiff and defendant.
Top-10 WTO countries involved in disputes
|
|
Party issuing the complaint |
Addressee of the complaint |
Network strength (number of cases) |
|
1 |
EU |
US |
33.11 |
|
2 |
US |
EU |
32.81 |
|
3 |
US |
China |
16 |
|
4 |
Canada |
US |
14.5 |
|
5 |
South Korea |
US |
10.11 |
|
6 |
EU |
India |
10 |
|
7 |
Canada |
EU |
9.166 |
|
8 |
Brazil |
US |
9.11 |
|
9 |
China |
US |
9 |
|
10 |
Mexico |
US |
8 |
Source: Report by research authors
The United States is also the leader in terms of decisions that went in its favor, however, the researchers stressed that the US also fails to implement WTO Court rulings in a significant number of incidents, which somewhat undermines its authority.
BRICS countries behave in different ways in trade disputes. The researchers found that Brazil, China, and India are both active as plaintiffs and defendants. Russia currently holds a peripheral position. ‘This is related to Russia’s relatively recent accession to the WTO. However, it would be safe to assume that in coming years Russia will become more active in the WTO dispute process,’ the researchers noted. How rapidly this happens depends on a number of factors, including Russia’s economic policy and the WTO’s own actions.
Not all countries that are part of the WTO in practice have the opportunity to become part of the WTO dispute resolution process. Lodging a complaint is a lengthy and complex process, particularly for small states. Without their own lawyers able to compile complaints for the WTO, they are forced to hire international professionals. In one piece of research the report notes that the cost of hiring professionals of this caliber exceeds $400,000 per case. Brazil’s case against the United States over cotton production subsidies cost around $2 million.
The only example of a small state being successful is in the 2003 dispute between Antigua and Barbuda vs the United States. However, the United States never carried out the court’s decision, and so the case was a rather fruitless one for Antigua and Barbuda. The high costs associated with bringing a case to court is not the only reason for a visible lack of equality before the WTO Court. The right to submit a case is held exclusively by the countries’ official representatives. The process itself is built on the expectation of there being a democratic environment in which businesses can count on their complaints always being taken to the WTO Court. In authoritarian countries not all companies can ensure their opinions are heard.
Nor is there any clear solution to these problems. The idea of ‘democratization’ exists, under which access to the court would be expanded from the countries’ official representatives to non-commercial organizations as well. But that could end up having a reverse effect, since the strongest and most active non-commercial organizations tend to operate in the more developed countries.
It is clear that the WTO’s dispute resolution system requires work — especially on the issue of equal access. There is significant evidence suggesting that the WTO’s role in recent years has been declining, and in conjunction with that — so has the frequency with which the term is searched for on Google. This could speak indirectly to a reduced public interest in the WTO. And there is also a decrease in the number of complaints levied at the WTO. The researchers feel that this indicates that countries are increasingly disinclined to view the WTO Court as an arbiter of their disputes.