World Trade Review 9 (3):457-485 (2010)
|Abstract||The WTO Dispute Settlement System (DSS) has been the object of many studies in politics, law, and economics focusing on institutional design problems. This paper contributes to such studies by accounting for the argumentative nature and sophisticated features of the DSS through a philosophical analysis of the procedures through which it is articulated. Jürgen Habermas's discourse theory is used as a hermeneutic device to disentangle the types of ‘orientations’ (compromise, consensus, and mutual understanding) pertaining to DSS procedures. We show that these latter are oriented primarily to put the parties in a position to reach mutual understanding. Such an orientation is no mere idiosyncrasy of the DSS but is the only one consistently conducive to the WTO's general aims, in response to the various types of disputes that may arise between its Members. Before closing, we bring our procedural considerations to bear on the reform proposals of the DSS.|
|Keywords||Discourse Theory Juergen Habermas Proceduralism|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Cristina Lafont (2003). Procedural Justice?: Implications of the Rawls-Habermas Debate for Discourse Ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (2):163-181.
W. S. K. Cameron (2009). Tapping Habermas's Discourse Theory for Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 31 (4):339-357.
Paul M. Smith (2006). The Application of Critical Discourse Analysis in Environmental Dispute Resolution. Ethics, Place and Environment 9 (1):79 – 100.
Hugh Baxter (2011). Habermas: The Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Stanford Law Books.
Christophe Larouer, WTO Non-Violation Complaints: A Misunderstood Remedy at the Heart of the WTO Dispute Settlement System.
Added to index2009-03-25
Total downloads13 ( #88,007 of 549,196 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,418 of 549,196 )
How can I increase my downloads?