There is a conflict of jurisdiction between the maritime environmental dispute settlement mechanism and the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, which can lead to conflicts in practice, especially with regard to free trade. This paper therefore analyses the EC-Chile Swordfish case, in which both parties to the dispute submitted their cases to both the UN Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the WTO panel procedure, and finds that the conflict of jurisdiction between the two mechanisms arises because of the conflicting concepts of their rules and the lack of specific provisions that make them equivalent in effect. As a result, it was not possible to exclude the jurisdiction of the other party, which could lead to different outcomes and a new impasse in dispute resolution. It is therefore important to harmonise the conflicting principles of the marine environment and free trade, and to establish a coordinating body between the two mechanisms in order to better resolve marine environmental disputes and ultimately help China to deal with such conflicts and establish its own environmental and trade regime.

Liu Yuting. Conflict of Jurisdiction and Harmonization Between WTO and Marine Environmental Dispute Resolution Mechanisms -- Concentrating on the EC-Chilean Swordfish Case. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences (2022) Vol. 5, Issue 6: 34-40. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJHSS.2022.050606.

[1] M. Orellana, 'The Swordfish Dispute between the EU and Chile at the ITLOS and the WTO', Nordic Journal of International Law 71 (2002): 55. 2002): 55.

[2] Tan Yusheng. The EC-Chile Swordfish Case Reconsidered: A Developing Country Perspective[J]. European Studies, 2007(03):107-119+160.

[3] EyalBenvenisti & George W Downs, 'The Empire's New Clothes: Political Economy and the Fragmentation of International Law' (2007) 60 Stan L Rev 595 at 596.

[4] Trade and Environment at the WTO, http:// www.wto. org/ english/ tratop_e/ envir_e/ envir_ wto2004_e.pdf; pages 4-5.

[5] Baidu Encyclopedia entry. [EB/OL]. https://baike.baidu.com/item/ Green trade barriers /10803297?fr=aladdin, Latest visit time:[2022-04-15]

[6] Article 39 of Annex VI to the International Convention on the Law of the Sea. [EB/OL]. http://www.un.org/zh/law/sea/los/annex6.shtml, Latest visit time:[2022-04-22].

[7] Shang Pingshan. Legal Reflections on Improving the Implementation Procedures of the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism [J]. Modern Business, 2019(21): 68-69. doi: 10.14097/j. cnki.5392/2019.21.033.

[8] Zhang Weibin. Analysis of parallel litigation in marine environmental protection disputes[J]. Journal of Huzhou Vocational Technology College, 2010,8(02):25-29.

[9] Liu Dan. The principle of sustainable development and the settlement of international maritime environmental disputes [C]. // Proceedings of the 2008 National Doctoral Academic Forum (International Law) - International economic law and international environmental law. International Economic Law, International Environmental Law. 2008:526-536.

[10] Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) case of ICJ judgment, Sep 1997. [EB/OL]. https:// www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/92/092- 19970925-JUD-01-00-EN. pdf. Last accessed: [2021-12-26]

[11] Zheng Zhihua, Song Xiaoyi. Challenges of global ocean governance fragmentation and ways to cope with it [J]. International Journal of Social Sciences (Chinese Edition), 2020, 37(01):174-183+8+13-14.

[12] Yang Zewei. On the legal aspects of international cooperation in maritime crisis management in the construction of "maritime community of destiny"[J]. Journal of China Ocean University (Social Science Edition), 2020(03):1-11