Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:23:59.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transparency of complex regulation: how should WTO trade policy reviews deal with sanitary and phytosanitary policies?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2010

VALENTIN ZAHRNT
VALENTIN ZAHRNT*
Affiliation:
Research Associate at the European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE), Brussels
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures that protect human, animal, and plant health can impede trade and provoke high-profile disputes. This paper argues that the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) could play an important role in defusing the trade-disrupting potential of SPS regulation. The most promising avenue is to review in greater detail the policy-making procedures that lead to SPS measures. How transparent and independent are countries' risk assessments of health hazards? Which provisions have countries taken to account for trade effects when selecting SPS measures? Do countries give foreign interests adequate possibility to voice their concerns over proposed SPS regulation? If reviews motivate countries to improve their policy-making processes, this will contribute to making SPS regulation less trade-restrictive and more effective in protecting health. To reach this objective, special trade policy reviews dedicated exclusively to SPS regulation might be introduced as a complement to the current reviews of countries' overall trade policies. Such a move could serve as a model for establishing further issue-specific reviews that address technical barriers to trade, trade in services, and other complex regulatory challenges.

Type
Review Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 217 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © Valentin Zahrnt 2011

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

Achterbosch, T. (2008), Between Safety and Commerce: How Sanitary Regulations Affect Global Dairy Trade, IPC Issue Brief 24, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Atik, J. (2004), ‘The Weakest Link – Demonstrating the Inconsistency of “Appropriate Levels of Protection” in Australia-Salmon’, Risk Analysis, 24(2): 483–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carruth, R. S. and Goldstein, B. (2004), ‘The Precautionary Principle and/or Risk Assessment in the World Trade Organization Decisions: A Possible Role for Risk Perception’, Risk Analysis, 24(2): 491–499.Google Scholar
Charnovitz, S. (2005), ‘An Analysis of Pascal Lamy's Proposal on Collective Preferences’, Journal of International Economic Law, 8(2): 449–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Codex Alimentarius Commission (2007), Procedural Manual, Seventeenth Edition, FAO/WHO.Google Scholar
Cook, D. C. (2008), ‘Benefit Cost Analysis of an Import Access Request’, Food Policy, 33: 277–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, D. C. and Fraser, R. W. (2008), ‘Trade and Invasive Species Risk Mitigation: Reconciling WTO Compliance with Maximising the Gains from Trade’, Food Policy, 33: 176–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, L. (2009), ‘Anti-dumping Investigation in the EU: How Does It Work?’, ECIPE Working Paper No. 04/2009, European Centre for International Political Economy, Brussels.Google Scholar
Disdier, A.-C., Fontagné, L., and Mimouni, M. (2008), ‘The Impact of Regulations on Agricultural Trade: Evidence from the SPS and TBT Agreements’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 90(2): 336–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epps, T. (2008), ‘Reconciling Public Opinion and WTO Rules under the SPS Agreement’, World Trade Review, 7(2): 359–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission (2000), Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle, COM(2000) 1 final.Google Scholar
FAO (2004), FAO Expert Consultation on Food Safety: Science and Ethics, Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
FAO (2006), Food Safety Risk Analysis: A Guide for National Food Safety Authorities, Food and Nutrition Paper 87, Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
FAO and WHO (2002), Expert Consultation on Food Safety: Science and Ethics, Rome.Google Scholar
FAO and WHO (2007), FAO/WHO Framework for the Provision of Scientific Advice on Food Safety and Nutrition, Rome.Google Scholar
Fontagné, L., Mimouni, M., and Pasteels, J.-M. (2005), ‘Estimating the Impact of Environmental SPS and TBT on International Trade’, Integration and Trade Journal, 22(3): 7–37.Google Scholar
Food Standards Agency (2000), ‘Report on the Review of Scientific Committees’.Google Scholar
French Delegation (2008), ‘Food, Feed, Animal and Plant Imports: Safety and Compliance with Community Rules’, Note to the Council of the European Union, Brussels.Google Scholar
Fulponi, L. (2006), ‘Private Standards and the Shaping of the Agro-Food System’, OECD Working Party on Agricultural Policies and Markets, Paris.Google Scholar
Ghosh, A. (2010), ‘Developing Countries in the WTO Trade Policy Review Mechanism’, World Trade Review, 9(3): 419–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, G. (2006), ‘Tipping the Apple Cart: The Limits of Science and Law in the SPS Agreement after Japan–Apples’, Journal of World Trade, 40(4): 655–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herwig, A. (2008), ‘Whither Science in WTO Dispute Settlement?’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 21: 823–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindley, B. (2009), ‘Cause-of-injury Analysis in European Anti-dumping Investigations’, ECIPE Working Paper No. 05/2009, European Centre for International Political Economy, Brussels.Google Scholar
Horton, L. R. and Wright, E. (2008), ‘Reconciling Food Safety with Import Facilitation Objectives: Helping Developing Country Producers Meet US and EU Food Requirements Through Transatlantic Cooperation’, IPC Position Paper, June 2008, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Howse, R. (2000), ‘Democracy, Science, and Free Trade: Risk Regulation on Trial at the World Trade Organization’, Michigan Law Review, 98(7): 2329–2357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Interagency Working Group on Import Safety (2007), ‘Protecting American Consumers Every Step of the Way: A Strategic Framework for Continual Improvement in Import Safety’, Department of Health & Human Services, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
International Risk Governance Council (2005), ‘Risk Governance – Towards an Integrated Framework’, Geneva.Google Scholar
Jackson, L. A. and Jansen, M. (2009), ‘Risk Assessment in the International Food Safety Policy Arena: Can the Multilateral Institutions Encourage Unbiased Outcomes?’, WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2009-01.Google Scholar
Jha, V. (ed.) (2005), Environmental Regulation and Food Safety: Studies of Protection and Protectionism, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Keesing, D. B. (1998), Improving Trade Policy Reviews in the World Trade Organization, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Korinek, J., Melatos, M., and Rau, M.-L. (2008), ‘A Review of Methods for Quantifying the Trade Effects of Standards in the Agri-food Sector’, OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No. 79.Google Scholar
Lamy, P. (2004), ‘The Emergence of Collective Preferences in International Trade: Implications for Regulating Globalisation’, available from http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2004/september/tradoc_118929.pdf [cited 18 March 2009].Google Scholar
Maertens, M. and Swinnen, J. F. M. (2008), ‘Trade, Standards, and Poverty: Evidence from Senegal’, World Development, 37(1).Google Scholar
Millstone, E., van Zwanenberg, P., Levidow, L., Spök, A., Hirakawa, H., and Matsuo, M. (2008), ‘Risk-assessment Policies: Differences across Jurisdictions’, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies and Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Spain.Google Scholar
Moenius, J. (2004), ‘Information Versus Product Adaptation: The Role of Standards in Trade’, available from http://ssrn.com/paper=608022 [cited 11 February 2009].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1996), Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2008), Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Office of Management and Budget (2006), Proposed Risk Assessment Bulletin, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Perdikis, N., Kerr, W. A., and Hobbs, J. E. (2001), ‘Reforming the WTO to Defuse Potential Trade Conflicts in Genetically Modified Goods’, World Economy, 24(3): 379–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Post, D. L. (2006), ‘The Precautionary Principle and Risk Assessment in International Food Safety: How the World Trade Organization Influences Standards’, Risk Analysis, 26(5): 1259–1273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romano, E. and Thornsbury, S. (2007), ‘Economic Evaluation of SPS Regulations: Where Can Progress be Made?: Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics’, Michigan State University, Staff Paper 2007–07.Google Scholar
Shaw, S. and Schwarz, R. (2005), ‘Trading Precaution: The Precautionary Principle and the WTO’, United Nations University and Institute of Advanced Studies Report.Google Scholar
Swinnen, J. F. M. and Vandemoortele, T. (2009), ‘Trade, Development, and the Political Economy of Public Standards’, LICOS Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornsbury, S., Roberts, D., and Orden, D. (2004), ‘Measurement and Political Economy of Disputed Regulations’, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 36(3): 559–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trienekens, J. and Zuurbier, P. (2008), ‘Quality and Safety Standards in the Food Industry, Developments and Challenges’, International Journal of Production Economics, 113: 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UNCTAD (2005), Costs of Agri-food Safety and SPS Compliance: United Republic of Tanzania, Mozambique and Guinea: Tropical Fruits, Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
UNCTAD (2007), Food Safety and Environmental Requirements in Export Markets – Friend or Foe for Producers of Fruit and Vegetables in Asian Developing Countries? Geneva: United Nations.Google Scholar
World Bank (2007), Agriculture for Development. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
WTO (2000), ‘Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of Article 5.5’, G/SPS/15.Google Scholar
WTO (2001), ‘Implementation-related Issues and Concerns’, WT/MIN(01)/17.Google Scholar
WTO (2004), ‘Procedure to Enhance Transparency of Special and Differential Treatment in Favour of Developing Country Members’, G/SPS/33.Google Scholar
WTO (2005), ‘Report on Proposals for Special and Differential Treatment’, G/SPS/35.Google Scholar
WTO (2006), ‘Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements’, WT/L/671.Google Scholar
WTO (2008a), ‘Guidelines to Further the Practical Implementation of Article 6 of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures’, G/SPS/48.Google Scholar
WTO (2008b), ‘Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement (Article 7)’, G/SPS/7/Rev.3.Google Scholar
WTO (2009a), ‘Specific Trade Concerns: Issues Considered in 2008’, G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9/Add.1.Google Scholar
WTO (2009b), ‘Specific Trade Concerns: Issues Not Considered in 2008’, G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9/Add.2.Google Scholar