GATS와 TRIPS 협정의 편향성 분석

An Analysis of the Biases in GATS and TRIPS Agreements : Based on the Dispute Settlements Related to the Provisions

Since the launch of the WTO system, there have been serious concerns that the newly introduced provisions, such as GATS and TRIPS, mainly reflected the interests of advanced nations. Based on disputes related to GATS and TRIPS brought to its settlement system for the last 20 years, this paper analyzes the supposed biases of the newly introduced provisions toward advanced nations. Through a basic descriptive statistical analysis and a more sophisticated empirical analysis with the help of logistic regression models, this paper shows that advanced nations in fact outperform developing nations. That is, advanced nations not only have brought major proportions of disputes related with newly introduced provisions but also had much favorable outcomes than developing nations. It has been shown that the U. S. was the most active complainant while the EU and other advanced nations were more frequently targeted in the disputes related to the newly introduced provisions. Although not all disputes were toward developing nations, the US was the most successful complainant as well as respondent in terms of dispute settlements outcomes. As all the results mentioned here were proven to have statistical significance, such results supported the arguments that the current contents of the newly introduced provisions of the WTO agreements favored the advanced nations, especially for the U. S.