¹ Such pairs are often referred to as “trade and …” and include, for example, trade and development, trade and the environment, trade and labor. For a discussion of the formulation of these pairs, see Lang, Andrew T.F., Reflecting on “Linkage”: Cognitive and Institutional Change in the International Trading System, 70 Mod. L. Rev. 523 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

² UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, Art. 1(g), adopted Oct. 20, 2005, entered into force Mar. 18, 2007, UNESCO, Records of the General Conference, 33rd Sess., Paris, Oct. 3–21, 2005, Vol. I, 83 [hereinafter Convention on Diversity of Cultural Expressions].

³ For a great discussion, see, e.g., Pierre Sauvé & Karsten Steinfatt, Towards Multilateral Rules on Trade and Culture: Protective Regulation or Efficient Protection, in Achieving Better Regulation of Services 323 (Productivity Commission & Australian National University eds., 2000).

⁴ See, e.g., Mira Burri, The Trade Versus Culture Discourse: Tracing Its Evolution in Global Law, in Culture and International Economic Law 104 (Valentina Vadi & Bruno de Witte eds., 2015).

⁵ See, e.g., Garrett, Lisa L., Commerce Versus Culture: The Battle Between the United States and the European Union Over Audiovisual Trade Policies, 19 N.C. J. Int'l L. 553 (1994)Google Scholar; Grant, Jonas M., “Jurassic” Trade Dispute: The Exclusion of the Audiovisual Sector from GATT, 70 Ind. L.J. 1333 (1995)Google Scholar; Footer, Mary E. & Graber, Christoph B., Trade Liberalisation and Cultural Policy, 3 J. Int'l Econ. L. 115 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bruno de Witte, Trade in Culture: International Legal Regimes and EU Constitutional Values, in The EU and the WTO – Legal and Constitutional Issues 237 (Gráinne de Búrca & Joanne Scott eds., 2003); Mira Burri, The EU, the WTO and Cultural Diversity, in Cultural Governance and the European Union 195 (Evangelia Psychogiopoulou ed., 2015).

⁶ See, e.g., Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, Finalized by Martti Koskenniemi, UN Doc. A/CN.4/L.682 (Apr. 13, 2006); Martti Koskenniemi & Päivi Leino, Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties, 15 Leiden J. Int'l L. 553 (2002); Pauwelyn, Joost, Bridging Fragmentation and Unity: International Law as a Universe of Inter-Connected Islands, 25 Mich. J. Int'l L. 903 (2004)Google Scholar.

⁷ See Shaffer, Gregory C. & Pollack, Mark A., Hard vs. Soft Law: Alternatives, Complements, and Antagonists in International Governance, 94 Minn. L. Rev. 706 (2010)Google Scholar; Lang, supra note 1; Alter, Karen J. & Meunier, Sophie, The Politics of International Regime Complexity, 7 Persp. Pol. 13 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸ Valentina Vadi, Cultural Heritage in International Economic Law (2023).

⁹ See, e.g., Valentina Vadi, Cultural Heritage in International Investment Law and Arbitration (2014); Valentina Vadi, Global Cultural Governance by Arbitral Tribunals: The Making of a Lex Administrativa Culturalis, 33 B.U. Int'l L.J. 101 (2015); Valentina Vadi, Intangible Cultural Heritage and Trade, in Research Handbook on Contemporary Intangible Cultural Heritage 398 (Charlotte Waelde, Charlotte Cummings, Mathilde Pavis & Helena Enright eds., 2018); Valentina Vadi, When Cultures Collide: Foreign Direct Investment, Natural Resources, Indigenous Heritage in International Investment Law, 42 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 797 (2011); Culture and International Economic Law, supra note 1; Art, Cultural Heritage, and the Market: Ethical and Legal Issues (Valentina Vadi & Hildegard Schneider eds., 2014); Valentina Vadi, Crossed Destinies: International Economic Courts and the Protection of Cultural Heritage, 18 J. Int'l Econ. L. 51 (2015).

¹⁰ Vadi, supra note 8, at 4 and passim.

¹¹ Id. at 347.

¹² Id. at 68.

¹³ See, e.g., id. at 327 and passim.

¹⁴ Id. at 94.

¹⁵ Id. at 121.

¹⁶ Id. at 230 and passim.

¹⁷ Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, Art. 3(2), Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 2, 1869 UNTS 401.

¹⁸ General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1867 UNTS 187, 33 ILM 1153 (1994) [hereinafter GATT 1994].

¹⁹ General Agreement on Trade in Services, Apr. 15, 1994, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1B, 1869 UNTS 183, 33 ILM 1167 (1994) [hereinafter GATS].

²⁰ See in particular China—Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products, Panel Report, adopted Aug. 12, 2009, WTO Doc. WT/DS363/R; China—Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted Dec. 21, 2009, WTO Doc. WT/DS363/AB/R; EC—Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, Reports of the Panel, adopted Nov. 25, 2013, WTO Docs. WT/ DS400/R and WT/DS401/R; EC—Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products, Appellate Body Report, adopted May 22, 2014, WTO Docs. WT/DS400/AB/R and WT/DS401/AB/R; Brazil—Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and Charges, Panel Report, adopted Aug. 30, 2017, WTO Doc. WT/DS472/R; Brazil—Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and Charges, Appellate Body Report, adopted Dec. 13, 2018, WTO Doc. WT/DS472/R.

²¹ China—Publications Panel Report, supra note 20, para. 7.751.

²² The Panel did however clearly dismiss the link to the UNESCO Convention on Diversity of Cultural Expression and noted its low normative value by referring to Article 20 of the Convention: “Nothing in this Convention shall be interpreted as modifying the rights and obligations of the parties under any other treaties to which they are parties.” Convention on Diversity of Cultural Expression, supra note 2, para. 4.207). The Panel noted further that, “[i]n any event, nothing in the text of the WTO Agreement provides an exception from WTO disciplines in terms of ‘cultural goods,’ and China's Accession Protocol likewise contains no such exception.” Id.

²³ Id., para. 7.913. The Appellate Body confirmed these findings.

²⁴ See, e.g., Valentina Vadi, Analogies in International Investment Law and Arbitration (2016); Jürgen Kurtz, The WTO and International Investment Law: Converging Systems (2016).

²⁵ Vadi, supra note 8, at 347.

²⁶ Mira Burri, The UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity: An Appraisal Five Years After Its Entry Into Force, 20 Int'l J. Cultural Prop. 357 (2014); Mira Burri & Keith Nurse, Culture in the CARIFORUM: European Union Economic Partnership Agreement: Rebalancing Trade Flows Between Europe and the Caribbean, UNESCO Report, 2019.

²⁷ In particular literature that has dealt with the interplay between international law and state regulatory autonomy; the interaction between international economic law and general international law; linkages between international trade law and cultural policies; and the relationship between international investment law and cultural policies. See, e.g., Investment Law Within International Law: Integrationist Perspectives (Freya Baetens ed., 2013); Ronnie R.F. Yearwood, The Interaction Between World Trade Organisation (WTO) Law and External International Law (2012); Jingxia Shi, Free Trade and Cultural Diversity in International Law (2013); Tania Voon, Cultural Products and the World Trade Organization (2007); Tomer Broude, Mapping the Potential Interactions Between UNESCO's Intangible Cultural Heritage Regime and World Trade Law, 25 Int'l J. Cultural Prop. 419 (2018); Sol Picciotto, Linkages in International Investment Regulation: The Antinomies of the Draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment, 19 U. Pa. J. Int'l L. 731 (1998); Lang, supra note 1; José E. Alvarez, The WTO as Linkage Machine, 96 AJIL 146 (2002); Patricia M. Goff, Trade and Culture: The Ongoing Debate (2021).

²⁸ See, e.g., Simon Evenett, Adam Jakubik, Fernando Martín & Michele Ruta, The Return of Industrial Policy in Data (International Monetary Fund Working Paper WP/24/1, 2024).

²⁹ For instance, the EU has stopped including Cultural Cooperation Protocols as an integral part of its trade agreements. See Mira Burri, EU External Trade Policy in the Digital Age: Has Culture Been Left Behind?, in European Union Economic Law and Culture 243 (Evangelia Psychogiopoulou & Sara Schoenmaekers eds., 2024).

³⁰ See, e.g., Burri, supra note 29.

³¹ See, e.g., Transnational Culture in the Internet Age (Sean A. Pager & Adam Candeub eds., 2012), Klonick, Kate, The New Governors: The People, Rules, and Processes Governing Online Speech, 131 Harv. L. Rev. 1598 (2018)Google Scholar.

³² Burri, supra note 29; see also Mira Burri, Trade and Culture in International Law: Paths to (Re)conciliation, 44 J. World Trade 49 (2010).