국제 법제화 현상이란 현대의 국제관계에서 국제법과 법적 기구가 차지하는 역할이 현저히 강화되는 경향을 지칭하는 것으로, 이는 (1)법 제정 단계에서의 다자주의 경향, (2)법 집행 단계에서의 집단적 처벌의 강화, 그리고 (3)국가간 분쟁해결 단계에서 법제화된 기제의 설립 등 다양한 측면을 내포한다. 법제화된 분쟁해결기제의 도입은 지역적, 국제적 무역체제애서 특히 두드러지게 관찰되는데, (1)명확한 내용적 법규, (2)잘 확립된 절차적 법규, (3)개별 국가로부터 상위의 권한을 위임받은 독자적 판정기구, 그리고 (4)법적 판례의 생산이라는 특징을 지니다. 조직적 집중성, 위임성, 그리고 판정의 강제성에 있어, 법적 분쟁해결기제는 중개나 비구속적 중재와 같은 비법적 분쟁해결기제와는 질적인 차별성을 보인다. 국가들이 독립적인 분쟁해결기구에 강제적인 판정의 권한을 위임하는 까닭은, 법제화된 분쟁해결 방식이 비법적 방식에 비해 긍정적 결과를 가져다 줄 수 있다고 기대하기 때문이다. 이러한 기대효과는 크게 보아 (1)분쟁의 거래비용을 줄임으로써 얻을 수 있는 효율성의 상승효과, (2)분쟁결과의 불확실성을 줄임으로써 얻을 수 있는 효용성의 상승효과, 그리고 (3)법적 방식에서 얻을 수 있는 분배상의 이익에 대한 기대로 구분될 수 있다. 국제무역의 양이 증가하고 참가하는 국가의 수가 증가할수록, 잠재적 현실적 분쟁의 빈도가 증가하며 분쟁의 이슈 또한 복잡해지는데, 이러한 조건에서 법제화된 분쟁해결기제는 분쟁해결에 소모되는 시간과 비용, 불확실성을 줄여준다는 장점을 지니며, 이러한 상호이익의 창출은 국가간 분배상의 갈등을 완화하는 효과를 가진다.

International legalization phenomenon indicates the tendency that international law and legal institutions have played an increasingly significant role in contemporary world politics. This phenomenon includes the following complex trends: (1) the increasing usage of multilateralism at the law-making stage, (2) the emergence of collective punishment mechanisms for certain types of violations and crimes at the law-enforcement stage, and (3) the judicialization of dispute settlement at the law-interpretation stage. The establishment and maintenance of an adjudicative dispute settlement mechanism are found in regional and global trading system. The key features of a legalized dispute resolution mechanism are (1) clear substantive rules, (2) well-defined procedural rules, (3) independent legal bodies with delegated authority in interpreting those rules, and (4) the provision of legal precedents. The legalized dispute settlement system qualitatively differs from the non-legal dispute settlement system (e.g. mediation or non-binding arbitration) in terms of its centralized organizational structures, delegated powers from its member states, and strict bindingness of its decisions. Due to these features, the legalized dispute settlement mechanism produces (1) an efficiency improvement effect by reducing transaction costs of dispute resolution, (2) a utility enhancement effect by reducing risks/uncertainties, and (3) a distributive effect that results from the content of law, application of law, and unevenly distributed efficiency gains. The reason that states agree to establish independent legal bodies, to delegate law-interpretation and law-application functions to the legal bodies, and to comply with the decisions made by the bodies is because states expect certain positive gains through the legalized system. As the amount and participants of international trade increases, as the potential and actual number of disputes increases, and as the complicatedness of dispute issues increases, a legalized dispute settlement mechanism, as compared with a non-legal mechanism, has become a more attractive option, since it reduces, the costs, time, energy and risks of dispute settlement and, as a result, produces mutually beneficial outcomes. These mutually beneficial outcomes also can mitigate the severity of distributional conflicts entailed by the dispute settlement process.

International legalization phenomenon indicates the tendency that international law and legal institutions have played an increasingly significant role in contemporary world politics. This phenomenon includes the following complex trends: (1) the increasing usage of multilateralism at the law-making stage, (2) the emergence of collective punishment mechanisms for certain types of violations and crimes at the law-enforcement stage, and (3) the judicialization of dispute settlement at the law-interpretation stage. The establishment and maintenance of an adjudicative dispute settlement mechanism are found in regional and global trading system. The key features of a legalized dispute resolution mechanism are (1) clear substantive rules, (2) well-defined procedural rules, (3) independent legal bodies with delegated authority in interpreting those rules, and (4) the provision of legal precedents. The legalized dispute settlement system qualitatively differs from the non-legal dispute settlement system (e.g. mediation or non-binding arbitration) in terms of its centralized organizational structures, delegated powers from its member states, and strict bindingness of its decisions. Due to these features, the legalized dispute settlement mechanism produces (1) an efficiency improvement effect by reducing transaction costs of dispute resolution, (2) a utility enhancement effect by reducing risks/uncertainties, and (3) a distributive effect that results from the content of law, application of law, and unevenly distributed efficiency gains. The reason that states agree to establish independent legal bodies, to delegate law-interpretation and law-application functions to the legal bodies, and to comply with the decisions made by the bodies is because states expect certain positive gains through the legalized system. As the amount and participants of international trade increases, as the potential and actual number of disputes increases, and as the complicatedness of dispute issues increases, a legalized dispute settlement mechanism, as compared with a non-legal mechanism, has become a more attractive option, since it reduces, the costs, time, energy and risks of dispute settlement and, as a result, produces mutually beneficial outcomes. These mutually beneficial outcomes also can mitigate the severity of distributional conflicts entailed by the dispute settlement process.