Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Peru and the WTO understanding on dispute settlement: a qualitative analysis of its strategies, limitations and lessons learned
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Peru and the WTO understanding on dispute settlement: a qualitative analysis of its strategies, limitations and lessons learned
Do you wish to request the book?
Peru and the WTO understanding on dispute settlement: a qualitative analysis of its strategies, limitations and lessons learned
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Peru and the WTO understanding on dispute settlement: a qualitative analysis of its strategies, limitations and lessons learned
2026
Overview
Since its establishment in 1995, the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) has operated as the core enforcement mechanism of the multilateral trading regime, providing a binding, rules-based forum for adjudicating trade disputes. Yet its procedural architecture exhibits structural asymmetries that affect the capacity of developing countries to litigate effectively. This study conducts a doctrinal and documentary analysis of Peru’s participation in DSU proceedings from 2003 to 2025, covering 31 disputes as complainant, respondent or third party. It identifies the main sectors implicated, the litigation strategies used, and the institutional and systemic variables shaping Peru’s performance. The findings show a largely defensive posture, constrained by high legal costs, limited institutional continuity and dependence on external counsel. Although technical capacity within MINCETUR has improved, systemic inequalities persist, including the paralysis of the Appellate Body. The study concludes with recommendations to strengthen Peru’s litigation capacity and support DSU reform.
Publisher
Taylor & Francis Group
Subject
