Purpose

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comprehensive systematic literature review using bibliometric approach to investigate the academic structure of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement research.

Design/methodology/approach

The study examines the bibliographic information for 1,858 articles from Scopus and the Australian Business Deans Council-indexed journals published between 1995 and 2024 using Dimensions.ai and Google Scholar search engines. Exploratory-cum-descriptive research design with bibliometric approach is used to answer the stated literature review research questions.

Findings

The data shows a gradual decline in WTO-Dispute Settlement System (WTO-DSS) research relative to the total international business area in the three decades. Developed countries appear as key contributors to the research, with the USA and the UK standing out as the most productive and influential research countries. The study shows a significant change in the focus of this research corpus from legalized to non-legalized approaches, with a greater emphasis on transparency and environmental sustainability. The research identifies global politics and international trade law as influential subjects in the discipline.

Originality/value

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the study is a first of its kind where bibliometric approach has been used to study the evolution of WTO-DSS literature. The study adds to the understanding of WTO Dispute Settlement research patterns and recommends future research options.

中文翻译：

---

世贸组织争端解决的三十年：文献计量文献综述和未来研究议程的见解

 目的

本研究的目的是利用文献计量学方法进行全面系统的文献综述，探讨世界贸易组织争端解决研究的学术结构。

设计/方法论/途径

该研究使用 Dimensions.ai 和 Google Scholar 搜索引擎检查了 1995 年至 2024 年间发表的 Scopus 和澳大利亚商学院院长委员会索引期刊中的 1,858 篇文章的书目信息。采用文献计量方法的探索性和描述性研究设计用于回答所述文献综述研究问题。

 发现

数据显示，近三十年来，世贸组织争端解决系统（WTO-DSS）研究相对于整个国际业务领域逐渐下降。发达国家似乎是这项研究的主要贡献者，其中美国和英国是最具生产力和影响力的研究国家。该研究表明，该研究的重点从合法化方法到非合法化方法发生了重大变化，更加强调透明度和环境可持续性。该研究将全球政治和国际贸易法确定为该学科中具有影响力的学科。

 原创性/价值

据作者所知，这项研究首次使用文献计量方法来研究 WTO-DSS 文献的演变。该研究增加了对世贸组织争端解决研究模式的理解，并提出了未来的研究选择。