Where’s the demand? Explaining the EU’s surprisingly constructive response to adverse WTO rulings

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe political significance of international institutions depends on whether states comply when doing so is costly. The IR literature suggests several reasons a state might do so, but does a poor job of explaining the actual choice. This article addresses that weakness by analyzing the causal pathways though which adverse World Trade Organization rulings prompt the European Union to change its policies. Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis, it analyses all EU policies successfully challenged before the WTO through 2017. It also presents two case studies of policies that the QCA suggests should be least likely cases for my argument. The article demonstrates that, contrary to many depictions, the EU almost always changes its policies in response to an adverse WTO ruling, although those changes frequently fall short of compliance. Further, it argues that the preferences of policymakers, rather than the demands of societal actors, provide the primary impetus for policy change.