Theory supports two opposing trajectories regarding the effects of trade provisions on micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) and on their integration into the global value chain (GVC). On the one hand, provisions such as increased competitiveness, networking support, and cooperation provisions enhance firms’ GVC participation. On the other hand, provisions that establish common standards and regulations that increase compliance costs can be burdensome for small enterprises. This paper examines the effect of such MSME-related provisions on participation in GVCs. By merging the World Trade Organization trade agreements and the World Bank Enterprise Surveys datasets, we contribute to the literature in two ways. First, we distinguish between trade-related and non-trade-related provisions. Second, we scrutinize the heterogeneity across sectors, income levels, and regions. Our results show a particularly positive effect of MSME-related provisions, with a larger effect of non-trade-related provisions compared with trade-related ones. In addition, this effect is particularly relevant to low-technology-intensive sectors, low-income countries, and Asian economies. Our results remain consistent when using alternative variables, sample characteristics, and estimation methods.

This article explores the global regulatory landscape for subsidies and countervailing measures, assessing its capacity to address challenges like climate change. While subsidies can effectively correct market failures and support public welfare, they also risk creating trade distortions and enabling protectionism. The analysis assesses the legacy of the Uruguay Round and the resulting Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and finds that it does not sufficiently distinguish between socially beneficial and negative subsidies. Current rules often disregard the intent and actual impact of government support, resulting in inefficient remedies being applied against positive subsidies. Reviewing past reform efforts, the author presents the ‘renewed net subsidy’ approach – a pragmatic proposal that seeks to balance the flexibility needed for legitimate policy goals with safeguards against trade-distorting actions, aiming to foster more nuanced, cooperative governance of subsidies within the international trading system.

What factors shape public opinion toward international law? Current research suggests that citizens respond strongly to negative cues, but have found limited effects for information about the potential benefits. We theorize that cues about the reciprocity of international law – that the parties face mutually enforceable obligations – can increase support. We evaluate our theory with a survey experiment in the United States (US) examining views towards Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), a frequently used but controversial dispute settlement mechanism in international investment law. Two findings stand out. First, consistent with previous research, the public is more supportive of international law if their country is the initiator rather than the target of a dispute. Second, when their country is the target, information about the use of ISDS by US firms, which we refer to as specific reciprocity, appears to increase support. More diffuse cues of reciprocity, however, do not affect support. Overall, our findings provide evidence that specific reciprocity cues can increase support for international law even when one’s country faces potential costs.

This article examines the interpretative divergence in China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, the first WTO dispute to address whether TRIPS obligations contain an implicit territorial limitation. The Panel adopted a strict territorial reading of Article 1.1, holding that TRIPS disciplines apply only to the implementation of minimum standards within a Member’s domestic legal system, and do not extend to measures where the effects are felt abroad. The Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) arbitrators reversed this approach, introducing a functional, effects-sensitive interpretation under which Members must implement TRIPS in a manner that does not frustrate the enforcement of intellectual property rights in other jurisdictions. The article argues that the Tribunal’s expanded interpretation is inconsistent with the text, structure, object and purpose, and negotiating history of the TRIPS Agreement. A close reading of Article 1.1 demonstrates that ‘give effect to’ refers to domestic legal operability rather than cross-border consequences. The systemic design of TRIPS, establishing a minimum-standards regime primarily concerned with the domestic implementation of intellectual property protection, further confirms that it does not impose transnational enforcement obligations. The article situates the WTO dispute, China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights within broader debates on the multilateral governance of intellectual property. While acknowledging that cross-border spillovers are increasingly common in global standard-essential patent (SEP) litigation, it maintains that such challenges are better addressed through institutional cooperation and private ordering than through judicial expansion of treaty obligations. The analysis clarifies the limits of WTO adjudication in the intellectual property (IP) domain and reaffirms territoriality as a foundational principle of the TRIPS regime.

Governments increasingly view data as a strategic asset, providing curated datasets and computing resources to domestic firms as part of national industrial development. This shift raises a fundamental question: can the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement), which was negotiated for tangible goods in a pre-digital era, accommodate state provision of data and computational capacity as subsidies in the twenty-first-century economy? This paper examines that question, not to argue for a definitive answer but to map the doctrinal pathway and identify key analytical steps, evidentiary requirements, and practical constraints. Rather than focusing narrowly on artificial intelligence, this analysis situates data provision within broader debates about WTO law’s technological neutrality, the evolving purpose of subsidy rules, and the resurgence of digital industrial policy. By tracing the function of data as a critical production input and analyzing specific state initiatives, this paper identifies key considerations for policymakers and adjudicators assessing the alignment of data infrastructure measures with SCM disciplines. The analysis reveals both the analytic promise of existing legal frameworks and their significant practical limitations.

This study investigates how institutional interactions shape bilateral trade dynamics within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), focusing on product-level trade composition, diversification, and the role of governance. Despite regional integration efforts, ECOWAS has seen limited export diversification and modest intra-regional growth in trade. Using a gravity model and detailed bilateral trade data, the study examines how the combined governance quality of trading partners influences trade flows, extensive margins (products per partner, and partners per product), and intensive margins (trade volumes, values, and average value per product per partner). The analysis highlights governance complementarities as key drivers of trade structure within the region. Results show that regulatory quality between trading partners is associated with greater product concentration, while complementarities in political stability support broader geographic market reach across trading partners. Reciprocity effects are also observed in the case of political institutions, suggesting that governance alignment reinforces trade ties. Voice and accountability displays a complementarity effect on the average value per product per partner, deepening bilateral trade relationships. These findings highlight the importance of understanding governance and institutions coordination and the interplay in enhancing intra-ECOWAS trade integration and carry broader implications for regional efforts such as the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA).

Provisions prohibiting the mandatory disclosure of source code and algorithms as a condition for market access in digital trade rulemaking aim to prevent forced technology transfer and safeguard confidential business information. However, their proliferation raises significant concerns regarding the state’s capacity to regulate digital technologies, including artificial intelligence. This Article argues that their rapid diffusion signals a regime shift in the international protection of software and algorithms, from intellectual property (IP) law to digital trade law. Under the TRIPS framework, trade secrets primarily protect undisclosed confidential information, such as source code and algorithms, and offer limited protection at the point of market entry. Source code provisions in digital trade function as an ex-ante layer of protection that operates independently of, yet cumulatively with, existing IP rights. Because digital trade law lacks the internal balancing mechanisms characteristic of the IP regime, regulatory space is mediated principally through the design of exceptions and carve-outs. By situating these provisions against this background, this Article reframes current debates from regulatory chill to the governance consequences of this regime shift and contends that the design of source code exceptions and carve-outs is now the primary mechanism for balancing proprietary protection against legitimate public policy disclosure.