Geri Dön

Regulatory regionalism and article XXIV of the general agreement on tariffs and trade

Başlık çevirisi mevcut değil.

  1. Tez No: 400015
  2. Yazar: MEHMET KARLI
  3. Danışmanlar: STEFAN TALMON
  4. Tez Türü: Doktora
  5. Konular: Hukuk, Law
  6. Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
  7. Yıl: 2010
  8. Dil: İngilizce
  9. Üniversite: Unıversıty Of Oxford
  10. Enstitü: Yurtdışı Enstitü
  11. Ana Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
  12. Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
  13. Sayfa Sayısı: Belirtilmemiş.

Özet

Özet yok.

Özet (Çeviri)

The last two decades have witnessed an unprecedented surge in the number of regional trade agreements (RTAs) concluded worldwide. One of the distinguishing features of these modern RTAs is that they go substantially beyond mere tariff elimination, and provide for rules in fields as varied as trade remedies, technical regulations and intellectual property. The provision of such regulatory content in regional deals creates the need to clarify the relationship between regulatory regionalism and the multilateral trading system. This study provides a new reading of GATT Article XXIV which defines the rules of this relationship. It examines the economic and historical arguments concerning RTAs, and finds that Article XXIV was not designed as a narrow exception. The analysis distinguishes between an overall consistency test and a test for the consistency of individual measures under Article XXIV. Under the individual consistency test, for a WTO-inconsistent measure to be justified under Article XXIV, it needs to constitute an elimination of an ?other restrictive regulation of commerce? (ORRC). Moreover, no ?other regulation of commerce? (ORC) should become ?more restrictive? after the formation of an FTA. The study maintains that the definition of the scope of the term ORRC determines the effective scope of regulatory regionalism. The term may be interpreted as delineating both a minimum and maximums scope. The evolutionary interpretation principle, as well as the purpose and factual context of the article, support this interpretation. The study argues that ?restrictiveness? should be the distinguishing feature of the term. ?Restrictive regulations? should denote all regulations whose restrictive effects are targeted by the WTO. The ORC requirement should not be read as imposing a freeze upon the applied levels of protection. Finally, the study applies this framework to the cases of WTO safeguards, and technical regulations.

Benzer Tezler

  1. Bilateral trade between Iran and Türkiye from historical perspective to current situation

    İran ve Türkiye arasındaki ikili ticaretin tarihsel perspektiften günümüze durumu

    MEHRDAD RAHMANI GHESHLAGH

    Yüksek Lisans

    İngilizce

    İngilizce

    2025

    Uluslararası Ticaretİstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi

    Uluslararası Ticaret Ana Bilim Dalı

    DOÇ. DR. YUNUS ÖZCAN

  2. Gümrük Birliği ve Avrupa Birliği`ne giriş sürecindeki Türk KOBİ`lerinin sorunları, çözüm önerileri ve Türkiye için bir destek ve teşvik modeli

    Through custom union and on the way of accession to European Union, the problems of Turkish SMEs and solution proposals: A support and incentive model for Turkey

    ERDAL BAL

    Doktora

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2002

    İşletmeAnkara Üniversitesi

    İşletme Ana Bilim Dalı

    YRD. DOÇ. DR. ARGUN KARACABEY

  3. Modernitenin 'tutarlılık' anlatısı üzerinden Berlin kent dönüşümünün mimari yarışma projeleri üzerinden okunması; duvar öncesi, sırası ve sonrası karşılaştırmalı bir değerlendirme

    Re-reading of the urban transformation of Berlin over the architectural competitions in the context of the discourse of 'consistency' in modernity; a comparative evaluation through periods before, during and after the wall

    EVİN ERİŞ

    Doktora

    Türkçe

    Türkçe

    2016

    MimarlıkYıldız Teknik Üniversitesi

    Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı

    DOÇ. DR. YASEMEN ÖZER

  4. Regulatory mechanism for oligopolies

    Oligopoller için regulasyon mekanizmaları

    İSMAİL SAĞLAM

    Doktora

    İngilizce

    İngilizce

    1997

    İşletmeİhsan Doğramacı Bilkent Üniversitesi

    PROF. DR. SEMİH KORAY