No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 March 2016
1 See, for example, Jackson, John H, “The Evolution of the World Trading System: The Legal and Institutional Context” in Bethlehem, Daniel et al, eds, The Oxford Handbook of International Trade Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) 30 at 41–44.Google Scholar Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, (1994) 33 ILM 1194. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 55 UNTS 194.
2 Davey, William J, “The Limits of Judicial Processes” in Bethlehem, , ibid 460 at 461.Google Scholar
3 See Hafner-Burton, Emilie M, Victor, David G, and Lupu, Yonatan, “Political Science Research on International Law: The State of the Field” (2012) 106 AJIL 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Ibid at 74, 77, 85–86, 90. See also Shaffer, Gregory and Ginsburg, Tom, “The Empirical Turn in International Legal Scholarship” (2012) 106 AJIL 1 at 30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Hafner-Burton, Victor, and Lupu, supra note 3 at 48.
6 Krikorian, Jacqueline D, International Trade Law and Domestic Policy: Canada, the United States, and the WTO (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2012) at 6, 11–12.Google Scholar
7 Ibid at 5.
8 Krikorian, supra note 6 at 13.
9 Ibid at 14–15.
10 Ibid at 81 (all respondent states listed in Figure 6).
11 See, for example, Hughes, Valerie, “The Institutional Dimension” in Bethlehem, supra note 1, 269 at 277 Google Scholar (panels and Appellate Body are sometimes called “quasi-judicial”); Steinberg, Richard H, “Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints” (2004) 98 AJIL 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar