Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:50:32.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morality clauses and decision making in situations of scientific uncertainty: the case of GMOs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2007

GARETH DAVIES
GARETH DAVIES
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, Free University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Special GMO Symposium
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , July 2007 , pp. 249 - 263
Copyright
Copyright © Gareth Davies 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bohanes, Jan (2002), ‘Risk Regulation in WTO law: A Procedure-Based Approach to the Precautionary Principle’, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 40: 323.Google Scholar
Broude, Tomer (2005), ‘Taking “Trade And Culture” Seriously: Geographical Indications and Cultural Protection in WTO Law’, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, 26(4): 623.Google Scholar
Chalmers, Damien (2005), ‘Risk, Anxiety, and the European Mediation of the Politics of Life’, European Law Review, 30: 649.Google Scholar
Christoforou, T. (2004), ‘The Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms in the European Union: The Interplay of Science, Law and Politics’, Common Market Law Review, 41: 637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranor, C. (1997), Regulating Toxic Substances: A Philosophy of Science and the Law, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Douglas, Mary and Aaron, Wildavsky (1982), Risk and Culture. An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Falke, Andreas (2005), ‘EU–USA Trade Relations in the Doha Development Round: Market Access versus a Post-Modern Trade Policy Agenda’, European Foreign Affairs Review, 10: 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feddersen, C. (1998), ‘Focussing on Substantive Law in International Economic Relations: The Public Morals of GATT's Article XX(a) and “Conventional” Rules of Interpretation’, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, 7: 75.Google Scholar
Howse, R. (2000), ‘Democracy, Science, and Free Trade: Risk Regulation on Trial at the World Trade Organization’, Michigan Law Review, 98: 2329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurt, C. (2006), ‘Regulating Public Morals and Private Markets: Online Securities Trading, Internet Gambling, and the Speculation Paradox’, Boston University Law Review, 86: 371.Google Scholar
Jarvis, L. (2000), ‘Women's Rights and the Public Morals Exception of GATT Article 20’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 22: 219.Google Scholar
Krajewski, M. (2005), ‘Playing by the Rules of the Game?’, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 32: 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krenzler, H. and McGregor, A. (2000), ‘GM Food: The Next Major Transatlantic Trade War?’, European Foreign Affairs Review, 5: 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kysar, Douglas (2006), ‘It Might Have Been: Risk, Precaution and Opportunity Costs’, Cornell Law School Legal Studies Research Paper Series no. 50 (August 2006), http://lsr.nellco.org/cornell/lsrp/papers/50Google Scholar
Marwell, J. (2006), ‘Trade and Morality: The WTO Public Morals Exception after Gambling’, New York University Law Review, 81: 802.Google Scholar
McGinnis, J. and Movsesian, M. (2000), ‘The World Trade Constitution’, Harvard Law Review, 114: 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadine Scott, D. (2005), ‘Nature/Culture Clash: The Transnational Trade Dispute over GMOs’, Hauser Global Law Working Paper 06/05.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D., Sands, P., and Stewart, R. (2000), ‘The International Challenge of Genetically Modified Organism Regulation’, New York University Environmental Law Journal, 8: 523.Google Scholar
Ni Chaoimh, E. (2006), ‘Trading in Precaution: A Comparative Study of the Precautionary Jurisprudence of the European Court and the WTO's Adjudicating Body’, Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 33: 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peel, J. (2004), ‘Risk Regulation under the WTO SPS Agreement: Science as an International Normative Yardstick?’, Jean Monnet Working Paper 02/04.Google Scholar
Pildes, R and Sunstein, C. (1997), ‘Experts, Economists and Democrats’, in Sunstein, C. (ed.) Free Markets and Social Justice, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J. (2000), ‘On Kith and Kine (and Crustaceans): Trade and Environment in the EU and WTO’, in Weiler, J. H. H. (ed.) The EU, the WTO, and NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade, Oxford Univrsity Press, p. 125.Google Scholar
Trachtman, J. (1998), ‘Trade and … Problems, Cost–Benefit Analysis and Subsidiarity’, European Journal of International Law, 9: 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar