Updated on 2022/01/28

写真a

 
FUKUNAGA, Yuka
 
Affiliation
Faculty of Social Sciences, School of Social Sciences
Job title
Professor

Concurrent Post

  • Faculty of Social Sciences   Graduate School of Social Sciences

Degree

  • University of Tokyo   LL.D.

  • University of California, Berkeley   LL.M.

  • University of Tokyo   LL.M.

Research Experience

  • 2016
     
     

    Assistant, International Law Commission 68th session

  • 2014
     
     

    Visiting Professor, Law School, Far Eastern Federal University

  • 2013
    -
    2014

    Capacity Building Seminar Lecturer (WTO Dispute Settlement, Trade Remedies, Trade and Environment)

  • 2012
    -
    2013

    Assistant Legal Counsel, Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

  • 2011
    -
    2012

    Visiting Fellow, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies

  • 2011.04
    -
     

    Professor, Waseda University

  • 2006.04
    -
    2011.03

    Associate Professor, Waseda University

  • 2002
    -
    2010

    Capacity Building Seminar Lecturer (WTO Dispute Settlement, Trade Remedies, Trade and Environment)

  • 2008
     
     

    WTO Lecturer for METI officials(2008, 2010)

  • 2005.04
    -
    2006.03

    Assistant Professor, Waseda University

  • 2000.09
    -
    2005.03

    Assistant Professor, University of Shizuoka

  • 2003
     
     

    Summer Program Lecturer, World Trade Institute (Joint Center of the Universities of Berne, Fribourg and Neuchatel

  • 2002
     
     

    Visiting Professorial Fellow, Institute of International Economic Law, Georgetown University Law Center

  • 2002
     
     

    Intern, Appellate Body Secretariat, World Trade Organization

  • 2001
    -
     

    Admission to the New York State Bar

▼display all

Professional Memberships

  •  
     
     

    Society of International Economic Law

  •  
     
     

    Asian Society of International Law

  •  
     
     

    American Society of International Law

  •  
     
     

    Japanese Association of World Law

  •  
     
     

    International Law Association, Japan Branch

  •  
     
     

    Japanese Society of International Law

  •  
     
     

    Japan Association of International Economic Law

▼display all

 

Research Areas

  • International law

Research Interests

  • International Law

  • International Economic Law

Papers

  • Precedent in Investment Arbitration: Is an Institutionalized Investment Court More Desirable?

    Yuka Fukunaga

    A New Global Economic Order: New Challenges to International Trade Law (Chia-Jui Cheng ed., Brill)     301 - 340  2022

  • SPS chapter under the TPP agreement and its implications

    Yuka Fukunaga

    The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Analysis and Commentary (Jorge A. Huerta-Goldman & David A. Gantz eds.,Cambridge University Press)    2021.12

  • Are Digital Trade Disputes “Trade Disputes”?

    Yuka Fukunaga

        155 - 172  2021.10

  • 国際経済法における国際立法ーILCによる立法の可能性

    寺谷広司編「国際法の現在ー変転する現代世界で法の可能性を問い直す」     101 - 111  2020.09  [Refereed]

  • Interpretative Authority of the Appellate Body: Replies to the Criticism by the United States

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Chang-fa Lo, Junji Nakagawa, Tsai-fang Chen eds., The Appellate Body of the WTO and Its Reform (Springer)   Chapter 10   167 - 183  2020

  • The Appellate Body’s Power to Interpret the WTO Agreements and WTO Members’ Power to Disagree with the Appellate Body

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of World Investment and Trade   20   793 - 820  2019.12  [Refereed]

  • Comment on “Trade Wars and the WTO: Causes, Consequences and Change”

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Asian Economic Policy Review    2019.08

    DOI

  • An Analysis of Chevron II Second Partial Award and Eli Lilly Final Award

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of the Japanese Institute of International Business Law   47 ( 7 ) 819 - 829  2019.07

  • An Analysis of Chevron II Second Partial Award and Eli Lilly Final Award

    Yuka Fukunaga

    KOKUSAI - SHOJI - HOMU (International Business Law and Practice)   47 ( 6 ) 691 - 699  2019.06

  • Margin of Appreciation as an Indicator of Judicial Deference: Is It Applicable to Investment Arbitration?

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of International Dispute Settlement   10 ( 1 ) 69 - 87  2019.03  [Refereed]

  • <2017年貿易・投資紛争の概況>投資仲裁決定

    福永有夏

      27   274 - 282  2018.11

  • TPPコンメンタール第18回 第19章 労働

    福永有夏

    貿易と関税   2018年9月   56 - 66  2018.09

  • Abuse of Process under International Law and Investment Arbitration

    ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal   33 ( 1 ) 181 - 211  2018  [Refereed]

  • 国際経済法における国際立法―ILCによる立法の可能性

    法律時報   2017年9月号   52 - 57  2017.09

  • TPP Commentary: Investment Chapter

    Trade and Tariffs     38 - 56  2017.05

  • TPP Commentary: SPS Chapter

    Trade and Tariffs     74 - 85  2017.04

  • TPP Commentary: TBT Chapter

    Trade and Tariffs     85 - 99  2017.04

  • Infrastructure Investment in Asia and Protection under International Investment Agreements

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Chinese (Taiwan) Yearbook of International Law and Affairs   33   109 - 138  2017  [Refereed]

  • 投資仲裁の動き(2016年)

    日本国際経済法学会年報   26  2017

  • A Managerial Approach to Secure Compliance with the SPS Agreement

    Yuka Fukunaga

    International Economic Law and Governance: Essays in Honour of Mitsuo Matsushita (J. Chaisse & T-Y Lin eds., Oxford University Press, 2016)     534 - 550  2016.07

  • Investor-State Arbitration based on UNCITRAL Rules

    Arbitration ADR Forum   5   7 - 16  2016.03

  • Comment to Chapter "Free Trade Agreements and Natural Resources"

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Emerging Issues in Sustainable Development: International Trade Law and Policy Relating to Natural Resources, Energy and the Environment (Matsushita, M. Schoenbaum, T. J. eds, Springer)     211 - 218  2016

  • メガFTAが変える国際標準化

    世界経済評論   682   26 - 32  2016.01

  • 書評:松下満雄・米谷三以『国際経済法』

    公正取引   781  2015.11

  • 国内法そのものの国際経済協定違反と救済:WTO紛争処理制度及び投資仲裁制度の分析

    国際法研究   3   37 - 58  2015.03

  • TBT協定の解釈及び適用に関する近年のパネル・上級委員会報告

    平成26年度貿易障害を生じる基準認証と国際規律報告書(国際貿易投資研究所)     20 - 39  2015.03

  • Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement Negotiations

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Japanese Journal of European Studies   3   44 - 57  2015

  • 二国間投資協定における最恵国待遇条項-その他の経済協定との比較を中心に-

    村瀬信也先生固輝記念『国際法学の諸相』(信山社)     585 - 602  2015.01

  • 解説:コトパンジャン・ダム事件—政府開発援助によるダム建設と賠償請求

    『平成25年度重要判例解説』(有斐閣)    2014

  • Transparency and the Role of Domestic Process

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Transparency in International Trade and Investment Dispute Settlement (Junji Nakagawa ed., Routledge)     30 - 48  2013

  • Experts in WTO and Investment Litigation

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Jorge A. Huerta-Goldman et al eds., WTO Litigation, Investment Arbitration, and Commercial Arbitration (Kluwer Law International)   Ch.5   135 - 167  2013  [Invited]

  • 書評:Ross Becroft, The Standard of Review in WTO Dispute Settlement: Critique and Development

    日本国際経済法学会年報   22   252 - 257  2013

  • 事実審としてのWTOパネルの機能-立証責任・検討基準に関する法理の発展とその意義

    『国際経済法講座』第1巻(日本国際経済法学会編、法律文化社)     163 - 178  2012

  • Standard of Review and ‘Scientific Truths’ in the WTO Dispute Settlement System and Investment Arbitration

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of International Dispute Settlement   v.3 ( n.3 ) 559 - 576  2012  [Refereed]

  • 世界銀行の開発政策と「立憲化」

    『世界法年報』   30   81 - 108  2011.03

  • 投資受入国の義務——サルカ[Saluka]事件(アドホック仲裁2006・3・17部分判断)

    『国際法判例百選〔第2版〕』(小寺彰・森川幸一・西村弓編、有斐閣)     146 - 147  2011

  • 権利制限規定と知的財産権条約-論点の提起と整理-

    日本国際経済法学会年報   19   145 - 165  2010.10

  • Global Economic Institutions and the Autonomy of Development Policy: A Pluralist Approach

    Yuka Fukunaga

    International Economic Law and National Autonomy (Meredith Kolsky Lewis & Susy Frankel eds., Cambridge Universiy Press)     22 - 43  2010.10  [Refereed]

  • Customs Law of Japan

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Customs Law of East Asia (Chia-Jui Cheng ed., Kluwer Law International)     117 - 164  2010

  • Discontinuity in the Internalization of the WTO Rules: Assessing the Democratic Deficit Critique against the Dispute Settlement System

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Alberta Law Review   46 ( 4 ) 1039 - 1059  2009.08

  • アンチダンピング:ゼロイングの歴史の終焉-それとも新たな始まりか?

    貿易と関税     42 - 52  2009

  • Civil Society and the Legitimacy of the WTO Dispute Settlement System

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Brooklyn Journal of International Law   34 ( 1 ) 85 - 117  2008

  • Chinese Taipei

    Isamu Mamiya, Bai Bagen, Yuka Fukunaga

    Anti-Dumping Laws and Practices of the New Users (Junji Nakagawa ed., Cameron May)    2007

  • Korea

    Lori Yi, Hiroe Otake, Yuka Fukunaga

    Anti-Dumping Laws and Practices of the New Users (Junji Nakagawa ed., Cameron May)    2007

  • 書評:John H. Jackson, Sovereignty, the WTO, and Changing Fundamentals of International Law

    日本国際経済法学会年報   16  2007

  • Participation of Private Parties in the WTO Dispute Settlement Processes: Treatment of Unsolicited Amicus Curiae Submissions

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Soochow Law Journal   4 ( 1 ) 99 - 130  2007.01

  • 韓国のアンチダンピング法制とその運用(上)(下)

    大竹宏枝, 福永有夏

    貿易と関税   2006年7月号、8月号  2006.07

  • Securing compliance through the WTO dispute settlement system: Implementation of DSB recommendations

    Yuka Fukunaga

    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC LAW   9 ( 2 ) 383 - 426  2006.06  [Refereed]

     View Summary

    The World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement system has been making substantial contributions to improved compliance with the WTO Agreements. Of particular note are the elaborate multistage mechanisms installed in the system that facilitate and ensure the implementation of the DSB recommendations. However, these multistage mechanisms are not devoid of problems and shortcomings. Several improvements are proposed by Members and scholars but a number of disagreements exist, reflecting varied understanding of the nature of the dispute settlement system. Against this background, this article first analyses the nature of the dispute settlement system. It argues that the primary purpose of the dispute settlement system is not to secure compliance in abstracto but to settle a dispute and remedy injury, and its compliance function is exerted only in the course of dispute settlement. Thereafter, in the light of the nature of the dispute settlement system, this article presents a comprehensive analysis of the manner in which the multistage mechanisms currently function and how they should function.

    DOI

  • Trade Remedies in East Asian Regional Trade Agreements

    Yuka Fukunaga

    The WTO Trade Remedy System: East Asian Perspectives (Mitsuo Matsushita, Dukgeun Ahn and Tain-Jy Chen eds., Cameron May)    2006

  • 書評:Federico Ordino and Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann eds., The WTO Dispute Settlement System 1995-2003

    福永有夏

    日本国際経済法学会年報   第14号   239 - 241  2005.11

  • 国際関係法辞典第2版

    国際法学会

    三省堂    2005.09

  • 投資保護協定と日本

    福永有夏

    『法律時報』   77巻 ( 6号 ) 66 - 71  2005.06

  • 書評:中川淳司編著「中国のアンチダンピング:日本企業への影響と対応策」ジェトロ(日本貿易振興機構)

    福永有夏

    『国際商事法務』   2005年2月号  2005.02

  • 「貿易と競争」

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2005年1月号  2005.01

  • An “Effect-Based” Approach to Anti-Dumping:Why Should We Introduce a “Mandatory Lesser Duty Rule"?

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of World Trade   Vol.38 ( No.3 )  2004.06

  • 「ECのインドからの綿製ベッドリネンに対するアンチダンピング措置(DS141)紛争解決了解21条5項に基づく手続」

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2004年1月号  2004.01

  • Argentina - Definitive Antidumping Measures on Imports of Ceramic Floor Tiles from Italy, Report of the Panel

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Selected GATT/WTO Panel Reports, Summaries and Commentaries   Vol.9  2003.12

  • “Marc Benitah, The Law of Subsidies under the GATT/WTO System (The Hague, London, New York; Kluwer Law International)

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Journal of the Japanese and International Economies    2003

  • 「通商救済法とWTO」

    福永有夏

    『WTOビジネスハンドブック』(渡邊頼純編著、日本貿易振興機構)    2003

  • 「熱延鋼板米国アンチダンピング調査(上)(中)」

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2003年1月号、2月号  2003.01

  • 「APEC」

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2003年1月号  2003.01

  • 「自由貿易体制の構造」

    福永有夏

    六鹿茂夫、小久保康之、前山亮吉編著 『国際関係学への招待』(三恵社)    2002

  • 「アンチダンピング調査開始決定の比較分析」

    福永有夏

    『静岡県立大学国際関係学双書』   19  2002

  • 「アンチダンピング制度の国際的調和〜協定解釈に関する審査基準に注目して〜」

    福永有夏

    『社会科学研究』   第53巻 ( 4号 )  2002

  • 「WTOと世界経済」

    小浜裕久, 福永有夏

    『国際経済』   53号  2002

  • 「ECのインドからの綿製ベッドリネンに対するアンチダンピング措置」、

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2001年9月号  2001.09

  • 「アンチ・ダンピング制度の意義〜「調査開始要件」に関する諸問題への視座〜上・下」

    福永有夏

    『貿易と関税』   2000年6月号、7月号  2000.06

▼display all

Books and Other Publications

  • TPP Commentary

    Japan Tariff, Association( Part: Contributor)

    Japan Tariff Association  2019.06

  • 国際経済協定の遵守確保と紛争処理 - WTO紛争処理制度及び投資仲裁制度の意義と限界

    福永有夏

    有斐閣  2013.09 ISBN: 4641046654

Works

  • Investment Claims Case Report: CEAC Holdings Limited v Montenegro, Decision on annulment, ICSID Case No ARB/14/8, IIC 1344 (2018)

    Yuka Fukunaga  Database science 

    2019.01
     
     

Awards

  • 2017 WASEDA RESEARCH AWARD

    2018.02   Waseda University  

Research Projects

  • Public-Private Partnership (PPP) for the Diffusion of Voluntary Sustainability Standards (VSS)

    Project Year :

    2018.07
    -
    2021.03
     

  • 国際経済紛争処理制度における国際法の原則及び規則

    Project Year :

    2018.04
    -
    2021.03
     

     View Summary

    2018年度は、主として2つの問題の問題を取り上げた。1つは、国際経済紛争処理制度、特に投資仲裁制度における評価の余地(margin of appreciation)原則の位置づけである。投資仲裁制度においては、国家の非経済的規制がしばしば申立ての対象となるが、投資協定違反に対する救済を図りつつも国家の主権(規制権限)を一定程度配慮することの必要性が高まっている。関連して、ウルグアイのタバコ・パッケージ規制をめぐる投資仲裁において、ウルグアイの規制権限を尊重すべき理由として仲裁廷が評価の余地原則を用いたことが大きな議論を呼んだ。2018年度は、一般国際法における評価の余地原則の位置づけを踏まえつつ、投資仲裁における評価の余地原則の適用可能性を論じる英文論文を執筆・完成し、欧州学術誌に公表することができた。もう1つは、国際経済紛争処理制度、特にWTO紛争処理制度における事実上の先例拘束性の意義と問題に関する研究である。WTO紛争処理制度は、上訴機関である上級委員会の解釈慣行の集積により、事実上の判例ともいえるものが発展し、WTO法の一貫した発展に貢献している。しかし近年、米国がこれを上級委員会による法形成として批判し、上級委員会の委員の任命承認を拒否し、上級委員会が機能不全に陥る恐れが高まっている。2018年度の研究においては、一般国際法における先例の意義と解釈宣言についての議論を踏まえつつ、WTO紛争処理における先例の意義や問題点について分析する報告を国際学会において行った。このほか、国際経済紛争処理制度の改革に関する議論を踏まえつつ、投資仲裁制度及びWTO紛争処理制度の現状や改革に関する様々な報告や論考を発表した。2018年度は、当初予定した研究テーマについて、国際会議発表や国際学術誌掲載を行うことができた。また、国際経済紛争処理制度改革に関する短い論考や発表等を通じて研究成果の一部を社会に還元することができた。2018年度の国際会議に提出したペーパーの一部は、共同研究者の都合によりまだ刊行物として公表に至っていないが、すでに提出は終えている。国際経済紛争処理制度の改革がますます緊急性を増しており、2019年度以降の研究はこの点を意識しながら研究を進めていくことになる。改革に関する議論は様々な視点で行われているが、本研究課題は「国際経済紛争処理制度における国際法の原則及び規則」をテーマとしており、当然のことながら今後改革論に関する研究を進めるにあたっては、経済分野以外の国際法の原則や規則との比較分析を主たる視点としつつ進めていく。国際共同研究加速基金(A)の内定をいただいたことを踏まえ、共同研究の下地を作る活動を進めていく予定である

  • Export of Infrastructure and International Economic Disputes

    Project Year :

    2015.04
    -
    2018.03
     

     View Summary

    This research analyzed potential and actual international economic disputes involving the export of infrastructure. In response to the growing demand for infrastructure around the world, businesses from developed countries, including Japan, has been actively involved in the export of infrastructure to other countries, particularly emerging economies. In parallel, the number of international economic disputes involving the export of infrastructure is growing. This research analyzed how these international economic disputes are reviewed by international judicial bodies, specifically, world trade organization (WTO) dispute settlement system and investment arbitration, and pointed out problems with the existing international economic agreements as well as international economic dispute settlement. At the same time, it made a theoretical analysis of the impact of the international economic dispute settlement on the autonomy of domestic law and policy

  • Research on Regulatory Cooperation and Rule Making

    JETRO 

    Project Year :

    2017.02
    -
    2017.03
     

  • Reform of the International Economic Dispute Settlement

  • Comparative study of anti-dumping laws and their implementation by WTO Members

     View Summary

    Based on the on-site survey trips and documentary analyses conducted during the previous two years (Aprl.2003 through Mar.2005), we conducted a series of in-depth comparative studies of anti-dumping laws, anti-dumping investigating authorities (both dumping investigating authorities and injury investigating authorities), anti-dumping investigation procedure (from initiation of investigation through imposition of anti-dumping duties) and sunset review procedure, conditions (both procedural and substantive) for applying anti-dumping duties, anti-dumping practices for the first decade of the WTO (1995 to 2004), and their compatibility with the rules of the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement, of the following target countries/territories ; China, Korea, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, India, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina and Brazil. Part of our research results were published in a series of articles in Trade and Tariffs (Boeki to Kanzei), monthly journal of international trade law. In 2005, articles on anti-dumping laws and practices of Mexico, Argentina and Brazil were published, following those of Thailand, China and South Africa in 2004., to be followed by those of Korea, Chinese Taipei and India in 2006. In addition, starting late 2005, we have been preparing for a book project, titled "Anti-Dumping of the New Users," to be published from Cameron May (London) in 2007. So far, chapters on China, Korea, Thailand, South Africa, Mexico and Brazil were written, proofread and style-checked., to be followed by the remaining three country chapters and introduction

  • Securing Compliance with the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement

     View Summary

    The research focused on factors and systems that induce compliance with the WTO Agreement. In particular, it revealed that the WTO Dispute Settlement System has made a substantial contribution in securing compliance with the WTO Agreement. In addition, it highlighted the role of domestic legal process in achieving the compliance by analyzing the domestic implementation of DSB (Dispute Settlement Body) recommendations as well as the application of the WTO Agreement

  • Studies on the Transparency in International Trade and International Investment Dispute Settlement

     View Summary

    This research project aimed at elucidating the possibility of enhancing transparency in international trade and investment dispute settlement through an international joint research of scholars of international economic law and NGO leaders by (i) analyzing the theoretical issues surrounding transparency in these dispute settlement procedures, and (ii) examining various policy proposals for enhancing transparency in these disputes. In 2008 and 2009, the research team held two panels in academic gatherings (Inaugural Conference of the Society of International Economic Law (July 2008, Geneva University) and the Asian Society of International Law 2nd Conference (August 2009, University of Tokyo)), and each member of the team made presentations on his/her research topic.In 2010, each member engaged him-/herself in writing final paper on his/her research topic, after discussing each other's presentations. At the time of this report, all members except Justice Feliciano have submitted his/her papers. Upon receiving Justice Feliciano's paper, the project leader will co-author an introduction with Mr.Daniel Magraw, and will compile all the papers in an edited book titled Transparency in International Trade and Investment Dispute Settlement, to be published from Cambridge University Press (CUP). The project leader has already contacted with the CUP, and has received a positive response toward publication from the latter.The details of the research result will be contained in the above book. Following are the outline of the research result :(1) Transparency in WTO dispute settlement and investment arbitration may be evaluated in light of (i) whether the dispute procedure is open to the public, and (ii) whether and to what extent the relevant documents (disputing parties' submissions and final decisions of the adjudicating bodies (reports of the Panel and the Appellate Body and arbitral awards) are publicly available.(2) These dispute procedures are less transparent than domestic court procedures and international adjudication (e.g., International Court of Justice) bur are more transparent than international commercial arbitration. This may be explained by (i) the character of the disputing parties (WTO member governments and host states and foreign investors), (ii) the characteristics of the subject matter of the disputes (both deal with the legality of domestic regulation but they indirectly touch on the interests of private firms), and (iii) both allows for the possibility of negotiating deals between the parties outside of the procedure.(3) On the other hand, in both procedures, the legality of domestic public policy are frequently at issue, which raises the concern of general public of the disputing states and thus an increasing demand for more transparency.(4) It is, therefore, necessary to strike a delicate balance between the specific characteristics of these dispute settlement process (see (2) above) and the justifiable demand for more transparency by the general public (see (3) above), and we hereby suggest that each dispute settlement process enhance transparency, taking into consideration (i) the characteristics of the issues and (ii) the characteristics of the disputing parties, and (iii) the need to protect business confidentiality of the private parties involved in the dispute. One member, however, asserts that there is no need to enhance more transparency in WTO dispute settlement process, because some dispute cases might be better solved through domestic court procedure of importing countries, where more transparency is secured

  • 米国アンチダンピング法の運用の研究

     View Summary

    1.EUにおけるアンチダンピング調査の研究米国のアンチダンピング法運用の比較対象として、EUのアンチダンピング法運用についての調査を行った。とくに、ゼロイングと呼ばれるダンピング・マージンの計算方法について、米国におけるゼロイングとの異同を調査・研究した。また、ブリュッセルにてEUのアンチダンピング調査担当者やアンチダンピング調査実務に携わる弁護士に対する聞き取り調査を行う機会を得、その結果をアンチダンピング研究会にて報告した。2.アンチダンピング紛争の研究本年度は、WTOにおけるアンチダンピング紛争にも注目した。WTO紛争処理制度は、米国をはじめとする各国のアンチダンピング法運用のWTO協定整合性を確保する制度として高く評価されている。とくに、パネルや上級委員会によってアンチダンピング法あるいは措置のWTO協定違反が認定された場合、各国が違反措置を是正するためどのような措置を採る義務を負うかという問題に着目して研究を行った。この研究成果の一部は判例評釈の形で公表した。3.義務的レッサー・デューティー・ルールアンチダンピング法の濫用を規制するルールの中に、義務的レッサー・デューティー・ルール(ダンピング輸入によって生じた損害の救済に必要な限度でのみアンチダンピング税を賦課するよう義務付けるルール)というものがある。平成14年度において執筆を開始していた英字論文を、雑誌レビューアーのコメントを踏まえた修正作業を行い完成させた。近々公表される予定である。4.海外における研究活動ニューヨーク大学ロースクールで、2週間あまりの調査を行った。レッサー・デューティー・ルールについての研究のほか、米国アンチダンピング法に関する資料を収集した

▼display all

Presentations

  • Australia and Japan: Securing an Open and Rules-Based Indo-Pacific Economic Region

     [Invited]

    Perth USAia Centre 2021 Japan Symposium 

    Event date:
    2021.03
     
     
  • WTO 紛争処理の現状と見通し

    福永有夏  [Invited]

    WTO改革の進展と収斂 

    Presentation date: 2021.03

  • The EU and Japan in a post-Covid world: the resilience of supply chains

     [Invited]

    Brussels School of Governance 

    Presentation date: 2021.03

  • Building Blocks: A Sectoral Approach to Asia-Pacific Trade

     [Invited]

    Asian Society Policy Institute (ASPI) 

    Presentation date: 2021.01

  • National Security from a Trade Law Perspective

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    National Security in International Law: An Asia-Pacific Perspective  ASIL’s Asia-Pacific Interest Group

    Presentation date: 2020.09

  • Judicial Review of National Security Exceptions under Article XXI of the GATT

    Yuka Fukunaga

    The 2020 ASIL IEcLIG Biennial: Designing International Economic Law: Challenges and Opportunities 

    Presentation date: 2020.02

  • Judicial Review of National Security Exceptions under International Trade and Investment Law

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Lancaster University CILHR Seminar Series  (Lancaster) 

    Presentation date: 2020.01

  • Japan’s Trade and Investment Policy and the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Conférence: Le nouveau partenariat UE-Japon : quelles perspectives ?  (Paris)  institut français des relations internationales (ifri)

    Presentation date: 2019.12

  • The Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement from a Japanese Perspective

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    EUTIP Seminar: EU-Asian Perspectives on Trade and Investment  (Singapore) 

    Presentation date: 2019.11

  • Are Digital Trade Disputes "Trade Disputes"?

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Asian International Economic Law Network (AIELN): The 6th Biennial Conference  (Taipei) 

    Presentation date: 2019.10

  • The Future of WTO Dispute Settlement and Investor-State Arbitration: Possibility of Cross-Fertilization

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    International Conference on "A Changing International Economic Order and the Response from International Law"  (Beijing)  WTO Law Research Society of China Law Society; University of International Business and Economics

    Presentation date: 2019.09

  • Precedent in Investment Arbitration: Comparison with Institutionalized International Courts and Tribunals

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Athens Workshop of the ESIL Interest Group on International Economic Law  (Athens)  European Society of International Law

    Presentation date: 2019.09

  • Dispute Settlement

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    WTO Reform and Possibilities  (Tokyo)  ITI/JFTC

    Presentation date: 2019.09

  • WTO Reform and the Role of Japan

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    IFI / GraSPP Research Seminar: WTO Reform  (Tokyo)  The University of Tokyo Institute for Future Initiatives

    Presentation date: 2019.07

  • A New Global Crisis and the WTO 2.0

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Re-Launching International Trade: Joining Forces in the Japanese G20 Meetings and beyond  (Milan)  ISPI

    Presentation date: 2019.06

  • WTO Reform

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement & Reforming the Multilateral Trading System  (Brussels)  CEPS

    Presentation date: 2019.06

  • Mutual supportiveness provisions in the EU-Japan FTA (JEEPA) and the CPTPP

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and International Trade Law Conference  (Seoul)  Yonsei Law School

    Presentation date: 2019.05

  • Law and Practice of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Japan Federation of Bar Associations

    Presentation date: 2019.03

  • A New Trade Dispute Settlement for Trade Remedy Disputes

    Yuka Fukunaga

    Tokyo Workshop on “Paradise Lost or Found? The Post-WTO International “Legal” Order (Utopian and Dystopian Possibilities)” 

    Presentation date: 2019.01

  • Interpretative Authority of the Appellate Body: Replies to the Criticism by the United States

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    Workshop on the “WTO Appellate Body and Its Reform” 

    Presentation date: 2019.01

  • Comparative Analysis of Interpretative Methods in WTO Dispute Settlement and Investment Arbitration

    Yuka Fukunaga

    2018 AWRN CIBEL Joint Conference  (Sydney) 

    Presentation date: 2018.08

  • The Appellate Body’s Power to Interpret the WTO Agreement and WTO Members’ Power to Disagree with the Appellate Body

    Society of International Economic Law 6th Biennial Conference 

    Presentation date: 2018.07

  • How Should Japan Respond to the US National Security Tariffs: Power-Oriented, Rule-Based or Rule-Oriented?

     [Invited]

    The Wisconsin – SNU Law Conference: International Economic Law in the Age of Anti-Globalization - Implications on Asia Pacific States  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2018.06

  • International Arbitration and Japan

    Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law 

    Presentation date: 2018.04

  • Private Standards and Regulatory Cooperation

    The 95th GSDM Platform Seminar International Symposium on “Private Standards and Global Governance: Possibilities and Challenges” 

    Presentation date: 2018.01

  • Margin of Appreciation and Judicial Deference in Investment Arbitration

    ASIL Midyear Meeting Research Forum  (St. Louis) 

    Presentation date: 2017.10

  • Comment: Trump Administration’s New Trade Policy and the World Trading System

     [Invited]

    Japan Korea Joint Forum 

    Presentation date: 2017.10

  • Investment Arbitration Cases involving the ECT

     [Invited]

    The Energy Charter Treaty and the Role of the Secretariat  Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    Presentation date: 2017.10

  • Paris Agreement in the WTO Dispute Settlement

    Yuka Fukunaga  [Invited]

    The Asian WTO Trade Forum  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2017.08

  • Currency Manipulation and Trade Remedies

    Annual Meeting of Asia WTO Research Network  (Taiwan) 

    Presentation date: 2017.06

  • Tobacco Regulations and Investment Arbitration

     [Invited]

    (Taiwan)  National Taipei University

    Presentation date: 2017.05

  • Abuse of Process under International Law and Investment Arbitration

    ASIL-MU Works in Progress Conference  (Columbia, MO)  American Society of International Law

    Presentation date: 2017.02

  • Allocation of Interpretative Power in WTO Dispute Settlement

     [Invited]

    Forum for the Asian WTO Moot Court Steering Committee  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2017.01

  • Does transparency remedy legitimacy concerns of private standards?

     [Invited]

    The 76th GSDM Platform Seminar "Private Standards and Global Governance: Prospects and Challenges"  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2016.12

  • Precedent in Investment Arbitration

    Yuka Fukunaga

    ASIL Research Forum  (Seattle)  American Society of International Law

    Presentation date: 2016.11

  • Procesural Issues of the UNCITRAL/PCA Philip Morris Asia v. Australia

     [Invited]

    Asian Society of International Law Japan Chapter  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2016.10

  • Report of the International Law Commission 68th Session (co-presentation)

    MOFA international law study group  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2016.09

  • Technical Barriers to Trade: Harmonization, Coherence, Cooperation

     [Invited]

    The 67th GSDM Platform Seminar International Symposium on Global Trade Order after the TPP: Opportunities and Challenges for Japan” (Tokyo)  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2015.12

  • Applicable Rules of International Law in Investor-State Arbitration

    CCIL (Canadian Council on International Law) 44th Annual Conference: International Law: Coherence Or Chaos? (Ottawa)  (Ottawa) 

    Presentation date: 2015.11

  • Rules of Origin in the TPP and Beyond

     [Invited]

    APEC FTAAP Capacity Building Workshop: Dealing with a New Trade Landscape: Complexities of Rules of Origin and Logistical Challenges of Trade Facilitation (Seoul)  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2015.09

  • Infrastructure Investment in Asia and Protection under International Law

    Joint Asian International Economic Law Conference: Regionalism in Asia-Pacific and Beyond: Challenges and Opportunities”  (Bali)  Asia WTO Research Network

    Presentation date: 2015.07

  • Discussant: Systemic Issues for WTO Anti-dumping and Countervailing Practices/Safeguard Issues in the WTO System

     [Invited]

    2015 International Conference on Trade Remedy System  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2015.06

  • Domestic Law as such and Domestic Law as applied

     [Invited]

    Madrid Arbitration Day II (ICADE and Club Español de Arbitraje (Under Forty))  (Madrid) 

    Presentation date: 2015.05

  • Linkage between Trade and Labor: Do Regional Trade Agreements Promote Labor Rights in Asia?

     [Invited]

    Workshop on Promoting Human Rights through Trade: European & Asian Perspectives (Jagiellonian University)  (Krakow) 

    Presentation date: 2015.05

  • The Experience of Japan in Dispute Settlement

     [Invited]

    International Forum on WTO law  (Kaliningrad) 

    Presentation date: 2015.03

  • The Present and Future of the World Trade Organization (WTO)

     [Invited]

    (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2015.03

  • Comment: Free Trade Agreements and Natural Resources

     [Invited]

    Symposium on International Trade Law and Policy Relating to Natural Resources, Energy and Environment - Perspectives on Sustainable Development -  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2015.03

  • WTO Disputes Involving Technical Regulations of the United States

     [Invited]

    (Tokyo)  JETRO

    Presentation date: 2015.02

  • What has the WTO achieved in the past 20 years?

     [Invited]

    International Symposium on “Mega-FTAs and Global Trade Governance”  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2014.12

  • Equivalence of SPS/TBT Standards and Public Policy Objectives

     [Invited]

    Korean Society of International Economic Law International Conference  (Seoul) 

    Presentation date: 2014.11

  • National Law in International Economic Dispute Settlement Systems

     [Invited]

    Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society of International Law  (Niigata) 

    Presentation date: 2014.09

  • SPS/TBT Disputes and Public Policy Objectives: Five Proposals for Reconciliation

    Society of International Economic Law (SIEL) Biennial Conference  (Bern) 

    Presentation date: 2014.07

  • A Managerial Approach to SPS Issues

    2014 Asia WTO Research Network Annual Conference  (Taipei) 

    Presentation date: 2014.06

  • Free Trade Agreements in the Asia Pacific Region and Japan

     [Invited]

    Far Eastern Federal University Law School  (Vladivostok) 

    Presentation date: 2014.04

  • Deference to National Law in WTO Dispute Settlement and Investor-State Arbitration?

     [Invited]

    Far Eastern Federal University Law School  (Vladivostok) 

    Presentation date: 2014.04

  • Investment Arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules

     [Invited]

    (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2014.03

  • Investment Arbitration under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules

     [Invited]

    Japan Association of Arbitrators  (Tokyo) 

    Presentation date: 2014.03

  • Comment, Arbitration: Private Procedure to Protect Public Interests?

     [Invited]

    Kyoto Seminar on International Investment Law  (Kyoto) 

    Presentation date: 2014.02

  • WTO紛争処理制度及び投資仲裁制度における国内法そのものの違法性審理

     [Invited]

    東大国際法研究会  (東京) 

    Presentation date: 2013.12

  • WTO Dispute between Japan and Canada concerning Renewable Energy (International Energy Governance)

     [Invited]

    Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law  (Washington, D.C.) 

    Presentation date: 2012.03

  • 国際機関の開発政策と世界政府思想

     [Invited]

    世界法学会2010年度研究大会 

    Presentation date: 2010.05

  • 権利制限規定と知的財産権条約—理論上及び実践上の問題—

    日本国際経済法学会第19回研究大会 

    Presentation date: 2009.11

  • Comment, From Rule Takers, Shakers to Makers: How Japan, China and Korea Shaped New Norms in International Economic Law

     [Invited]

    International Symposium Organised by the Japan Chapter of the Asian Society of International Law 

    Presentation date: 2009.08

  • Discontinuity in the Internalization of the WTO Rules: Assessing the Democratic Deficit Critique against the Dispute Settlement System

    Four Societies Workshop on International Law and Democratic Theory 

    Presentation date: 2008.09

  • Transparency of the Trade Dispute Settlement Process

    Society of International Economic Law: Inaugural Conference 

    Presentation date: 2008.07

  • グローバル経済制度と途上国開発政策の自律性

    東大国際法研究会 第290回 

    Presentation date: 2007.12

  • Global Economic Institutions and the Autonomy of the Development Policy: A Pluralist Approach

    New Zealand Centre of International Economic Law: Inaugural Conference 

    Presentation date: 2007.12

  • Participation of Private Parties in the WTO Dispute Settlement Processes

    Taipei Conference on International and Comparative Law 

    Presentation date: 2006.12

  • Who Benefits from RTA Dispute Settlement Procedures?

    APEC Capacity Building for the New International Architecture in Trade and Investment: Hawaii Workshop 

    Presentation date: 2006.10

  • Trade Remedies in East Asian Regional Trade Agreements

    International Conference on Trade Remedy System: East Asian Perspectives 

    Presentation date: 2005.08

  • WTOと世界経済(小浜裕久教授との共同発表)

    日本国際経済学会第60回記念全国大会 

    Presentation date: 2001.10

▼display all

Specific Research

  • 国際裁判手続における国内法の位置づけ

    2014  

     View Summary

    本課題においては、国際裁判手続の中でも国際経済紛争処理制度(世界貿易機関(WTO)紛争処理制度及び投資仲裁制度)に焦点を絞り、国際経済紛争処理制度において、国内法の国際経済協定適合性がどのように審査される(べき)かについて研究を行った。本研究は、国際経済協定の遵守確保の要請と国家の規制権限尊重の要請とがいかにバランスされる(べき)かを論じるとともに、この問題が国際法と国内法の関係(特に国際法秩序における国内法の位置づけ)についての示唆を孕んでいることを指摘した。

  • 国際投資仲裁における最恵国待遇条項

    2013  

     View Summary

     二国間投資協定(BIT)の最恵国待遇条項は、BIT(基本条約)の一方の締約国が、他方の締約国の投資家や投資財産に対し、第三国とのBIT(第三国条約)に基づき第三国の投資家や投資財産に与える待遇よりも不利でない待遇を与えることを求める。換言すれば、基本条約の他方の締約国の投資家は、基本条約の最恵国待遇条項を介し、第三国条約によって与えられている第三国の投資家や投資財産に対する有利な待遇を、自らやその投資財産に適用するよう求めることができる。 近年、基本条約の最恵国待遇条項が第三国条約を根拠として基本条約上の保護を拡大し得る範囲について投資仲裁の中で相矛盾する決定が多数発出され、注目を集めている。すなわち、最恵国待遇条項を広く解し、第三国条約の実体上及び手続上の保護を基本条約の他方の締約国の投資家や投資財産にも与えるべきと結論する仲裁決定がある一方で、最恵国待遇条項を狭く解し、特に第三国条約の手続上の保護を基本条約の他方の締約国の投資家や投資財産に与える範囲を限定しようとする仲裁決定もある。最恵国待遇条項の解釈をめぐる尖鋭な対立は、投資仲裁の正統性を危うくすると危惧されることもある。 本研究は、物品貿易、サービス貿易、知的財産権、政府調達について、BIT以外の経済協定、とりわけ世界貿易機関(WTO)協定や地域貿易協定(RTA)に定められる最恵国待遇条項を分析し、それとの比較でBITの最恵国待遇条項の特異性を明らかにした。 すなわち第一に、物品貿易や知的財産権に関する最恵国待遇条項が、多角的貿易体制を安定させる無差別待遇義務として機能している一方で、BITの最恵国待遇条項は、その保護の内実が第三国条約との関係で決定されるという意味で、むしろ経済関係を不安定にしている。第二に、物品貿易やサービス貿易については、最恵国待遇条項によって生じ得る不均衡を矯正するための例外や免除が認められているが、BITについてはそのような最恵国待遇条項の例外や免除が定められていない場合も少なくない。第三に、サービス貿易や政府調達に関する最恵国待遇条項は、第三国条約上のより有利な待遇が基本条約の締約国にも適用されるよう交渉を行うことを求めるにとどまるが、BITの最恵国待遇条項は、BITの一方の締約国の投資家が、仲裁において最恵国待遇条項に基づく利益を自らの法的権利として主張することを可能にしている。 本論文は、こうしたBITの最恵国待遇条項の特異性が、BITの最恵国待遇条項をどのように解釈すべきかについての議論を必然的に惹起し、BITの最恵国待遇条項の解釈の対立を生んでいると指摘した。 本研究の成果の一部は、2月及び3月(2回)に行われた会議において、発表した。 また、本研究の成果は、3月に脱稿した論文(2014年刊行予定の書籍に収録)においてまとめた。

  • WTO(世界貿易機関)紛争解決機関(DSB)勧告の履行確保

    2005  

     View Summary

     WTO紛争処理制度は、WTO加盟国間の貿易紛争を解決し、WTO協定の履行確保を図るための制度である。この制度の下、他の加盟国(被申立国)の措置がWTO協定に違反しているとの申立を加盟国(申立国)が提起すると、パネルや上級委員会と呼ばれる準司法機関はWTO法に基づき申立の対象となった措置の違法性を審査する。さらに、措置の違法性を認定した場合には、被申立国に対して措置を修正あるいは撤廃してWTO協定に適合させるよう勧告する(DSB勧告と呼ばれる)。近年、被申立国たる加盟国がこのDSB勧告を実施しない事例が散見される。本研究は、DSB勧告の履行を確保するためにWTO紛争処理制度をどのように改善すべきかを明らかにすることを目的とした。 本研究の成果の一つは、DSB勧告の履行確保に関する綿密な実証分析を行い、それを踏まえて制度改善の提案を行なった点である。WTOには、DSB勧告の履行確保を図る手段として、①パネルや上級委員会によるDSB勧告実施方法の提案、②DSB勧告実施期間に関する仲裁手続、③DSBによるDSB勧告実施状況の監視、④DSB勧告実施措置の合法性についてのパネル及び上級委員会審査、⑤DSB勧告不実施の場合の代償・対抗措置といったものが準備されている。これまでこうした手段を包括的に扱った研究はなかったが、本研究はこれら各手段の相互関係にも注意を払いながら包括的な実証分析を行い、かつ改善のための提言を行なった。 本研究のもう一つの成果は、単にWTOの実証研究を行うのみならず、国際法学における履行確保に関する過去の研究との関係で、WTOにおける履行確保問題についての理論的検討を行った点にある。特に、環境や人権などの分野において導入されている新たな履行確保の方法と対比させながら、WTO紛争処理制度を通じた履行確保のあり方とその意義について検討した。

Overseas Activities

  • 国際経済紛争処理手続

    2011.02
    -
    2013.02

    スイス   国際開発高等研究所

    オランダ   常設仲裁裁判所

 

Syllabus

▼display all

 

Media Coverage

▼display all