個案總覽

In January 2021, the Japanese fashion company Uniqlo was accused of using forced labour in its supply chains. Various news reports had been claiming that Uyghur Muslims were being detained and forced to work on cotton farms, production factories, and processing facilities in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. The United States Customs and Border Protection claimed that Uniqlo was not able to fully demonstrate that its products and inputs were manufactured without use of forced labour or modern slavery in Xinjiang, China and issued a Withhold Release Order to detain Uniqlo’s shipment of cotton garments. Uniqlo’s attempts to dispute the allegations and overturn the WRO were unsuccessful. The company had to find a way to ensure transparency and uphold traceability across all streams of its value chain activity. But how could Uniqlo ensure ethical sourcing for all aspects of its products, given limited oversight over suppliers and subcontractors? Was cotton traceability a viable and feasible option? How could Uniqlo ensure the compliance all key actors in its value chain streams, across tiers of suppliers and layers of subcontractors?

In 2020, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the cornerstone of the multilateral rules-based global trading system, faced the biggest crisis of its existence. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic swept the globe, two of the organization's main functions - providing a negotiation forum to establish new trade rules and resolving disputes between its 164 members - had faced challenges. The crisis facing the WTO had been largely created by the growing geopolitical competition between the U.S. and China. The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump was convinced that the WTO could not handle the problems created by China's economic ascent. It believed, first of all, that China's status as a developing country at the WTO gave it an unfair advantage in the international trade arena. Second, it believed the WTO's rules could not address the challenges presented by China with regard to state-owned enterprises and industrial subsidies. Third, it claimed that the Appellate Body had consistently committed judicial overreach in a way that hurt U.S. interests. Based entirely on public information, this case gives students an opportunity to reflect on the WTO's role in today's global economy and how the strategic rivalry between the U.S. and China were challenging the multilateral trading system.

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) had faced the largest existential crisis since its founding in 1948. The directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system, WHO had been severely criticized for its response to the COVID-19 pandemic by several member countries - especially the U.S. The organization had been accused of being too China-centric, not doing enough to quickly obtain accurate information from China about the new airborne illness, failing to press China for the speedy admittance of a WHO team of international experts, and only declaring the spread of COVID-19 to be a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) at a time and in a manner that was deferential to the Chinese government. Dissatisfied with WHO's actions, U.S. President Donald Trump decided in April 2020 to suspend funding to the international organization and, three months later, formally withdrew the U.S. from WHO. Based entirely on public information, this case gives students an opportunity to reflect on WHO's role in dealing with global health crises, why it was criticized during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, whether that criticism was warranted, and how the organization could be reformed to prepare for future PHEICs.

In January 2021, the Japanese fashion company Uniqlo was accused of using forced labour in its supply chains. Various news reports had been claiming that Uyghur Muslims were being detained and forced to work on cotton farms, production factories, and processing facilities in China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. The United States Customs and Border Protection claimed that Uniqlo was not able to fully demonstrate that its products and inputs were manufactured without use of forced labour or modern slavery in Xinjiang, China and issued a Withhold Release Order to detain Uniqlo's shipment of cotton garments. Uniqlo's attempts to dispute the allegations and overturn the WRO were unsuccessful. The company had to find a way to ensure transparency and uphold traceability across all streams of its value chain activity. But how could Uniqlo ensure ethical sourcing for all aspects of its products, given limited oversight over suppliers and subcontractors? Was cotton traceability a viable and feasible option? How could Uniqlo ensure the compliance all key actors in its value chain streams, across tiers of suppliers and layers of subcontractors?

In 2013, Michael Froman, the newly appointed United States Trade Representative, was responsible for leading the U.S. negotiating team in the formulation of the terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). During the negotiations, Froman had to adopt a position on the sensitive issue of tariffs on imported footwear. On the one hand, Vietnam, a TPP member country, was America's second largest foreign footwear supplier and was pushing for the elimination of tariffs. On the other hand, U.S. labour unions argued that Vietnam's strength in the footwear industry was based on unfair subsidies and labour practices. Even among U.S. footwear companies, there was disagreement. New Balance, the only U.S. athletic footwear company that produced parts of its shoes in the U.S., was openly opposed to the elimination of tariffs, as their removal could lead to factory closures in the U.S. Nike Inc., however, manufactured all its shoes overseas and was an overt proponent of the abolition of tariffs. Froman had to carefully weigh the arguments of all the stakeholders to determine whether or not to accept the lowering of tariffs on footwear imported from Vietnam and, if he accepted, whether or not to impose conditions on Vietnam.