International Relations

C09(b) - Global Governance 2: International Organizations

Date: Jun 4 | Time: 08:30am to 10:00am | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Brian Bow (Dalhousie University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Andrew Cooper (University of Waterloo)

Unraveling of the Trade Legal Order: Enforcement, Defection and the Crisis of the WTO Dispute Settlement System Kristen Hopewell, University of British Columbia Experiences May Vary: Military Implementation of WPS across International Organizations Yerin Chung, Queen's University Who Benefits from the Rise of Informality in Global Governance Networks? Carsten-Andreas Schulz, University of Cambridge Jerome Simons, University of Cambridge Vincent Pouliot, McGill University The Work Organization of Global Governance

Unraveling of the Trade Legal Order: Enforcement, Defection and the Crisis of the WTO Dispute Settlement System: Kristen Hopewell (University of British Columbia)
Abstract: The WTO dispute settlement mechanism has been considered the crown jewel of the multilateral trading system, essential to enforcing global trade rules. However, the US disabled the Appellate Body in 2019 by blocking judicial appointments. Nearly five years since the Appellate Body collapse, there has yet to be a concrete assessment of its impact. This paper marshals available data to assess the effects of the Appellate Body blockage on the WTO dispute settlement system. As it shows, many states – not just the US – are increasingly taking advantage of the absence of a functional Appellate Body to block WTO panel rulings by appealing into the void. Indeed, most WTO disputes are now being appealed into the void, depriving them of any legal force. Furthermore, the Appellate Body crisis now appears to be turning into a broader crisis of the WTO dispute system. The number of cases taken to the WTO has plummeted to approximately one-third of the level prior to the Appellate Body collapse, signaling that states no longer see the WTO dispute settlement system as an effective means to enforce the rules and defend their trade rights. The legal order that previously underpinned global trade is now beginning to crumble.

Who Benefits from the Rise of Informality in Global Governance Networks?: Jerome Simons (University of Cambridge)
Abstract: Global governance is increasingly shifting away from traditional, formal international organizations like the UN or WTO and toward informal arrangements and groupings such as the G20 and BRICS. While scholars generally agree that informal networks now play a significant role in global governance, they disagree on the power-political implications of this shift. Some argue that informality fosters a more egalitarian order, potentially disrupting the dominance of Western powers. Others contend that informality deepens existing inequalities among states: while informal settings grant major powers extensive decision-making access through summits and “minilateral” forums, smaller states—historically reliant on formal institutions that uphold sovereign equality and universal participation—are often marginalized. To evaluate these competing claims, this paper introduces a new method for estimating centrality scores in time-dependent networks, allowing for comparisons of states' relative positions in formal and informal organizations over time. The analysis reveals the emergence of highly central states as informality becomes more prominent. As multilateral structures are reconfigured, it appears that most smaller states are positioned to lose in this transformative shift.

Participants:
Yerin Chung (Queen's University)