메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국국제경제법학회 국제경제법연구 國際經濟法硏究 第4卷
발행연도
2006.12
수록면
121 - 157 (37page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
In 2002, Brazil expressed its growing concerns about U.S. cotton subsidies by initiating a WTO dispute settlement case against certain features of the U.S. cotton program. Panel and AB concluded that various payments for upland cotton which were conferred by U.S were export subsidies and trade distorting domestic subsides so that they prejudice brazilian upland cotton producer by suppressing international price. Also, with regard to subsidies that are turned out prejudicing brazilian upland cotton farmers, panel stated article 7.8 of SCM Agreement, therefore U.S. was obilged to take steps to remove the adverse effects or withdraw the subsidy by June 30, 2005.
AoA does not define subsidy whereas SCM Agreement provides definition of subsidy in a clear way thus panel and AB establish the significance of subsidy. This leads to diversity of opinion what is agriculture subsidy. Because there have been no study on relationship between AoA and SCM Agreement until now, this article initially aims to give an outline of upland cotton dispute and tries to find out implication for us by analyzing panel and AB's rulings.
The panel and AB's rulings provide guideline for the way to interpret subsidy which have not defined in AoA and it is of importance dealing with a role of peace clause, the relationship between AoA and others in detail. It is the agricultural area that emerges different point of views in DDA negotiation. Thus it is anticipated that there will be many disputes among WTO members on agriculture subsidy regardless of which direction the negotiation will take. In this context, it is very appropriate and timely to understand background and fact about agriculture related disputes. Also we have to prepare correspondence logic for potential disputes by knowing and comprehending WTO's way to interpret AoA well.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 사건의 개요
Ⅲ. 패널의 판정 및 이유
Ⅳ. 항소기구의 판정과 이유
Ⅴ. 패널과 항소기구의 판정에 대한 분석과 양국의 반응
Ⅵ. 항소기구 판정의 의의
[ABSTRACT]

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-361-002576448