Abstract
This final chapter draws together the analysis of previous chapters to summarise the main findings on the influence of the SPS Agreement on EU food regulations. It reflects on the potential limitations of this research for drawing broader conclusions about the operation of the SPS regime and, finally, considers possible areas of future research on the Agreement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For example, following discrepancies between EFSA and JECFA proposals for a guidance value for permitted cadmium intake in food drawing on the same database, EFSA reviewed and confirmed the validity of its lower values. See EFSA, Comparison of the Approaches Taken by EFSA and JECFA to Establish a HBGV for Cadmium (2011) 9 EFSA Journal 2006.
- 2.
DE Winickoff and DM Bushey, ‘Science and Power in Global Food Regulation: The Rise of the Codex Alimentarius’ (2010) 35 Science, Technology and Human Values 356, 364.
- 3.
Wolfe has appropriately captured this impact through the image of a ‘great pyramid’, with the ‘Appellate Body [as] merely the small tip of a substantial pyramid of WTO activity, and most of the real action in holding Members accountable for their obligations … lower down towards the base’. R Wolfe, ‘Letting the Sun Shine in at the WTO: How Transparency Brings the Trading System to Life’ (2013) WTO Economic Research and Statistics Division, Staff Working Paper, ERSD-2013-03, www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201303_e.pdf.
- 4.
We need only to consider the demise of the ‘meat-glue’ additive thrombin recounted in Chap. 4 above.
- 5.
Indeed a recent OECD survey on pesticide residue policies points to an inconsistent response to Codex MRLs which mirror the findings in ch 7 above on the GSFA. See OECD, ‘Survey on Pesticide Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) Policies: Survey Results, Series on Pesticides No. 51’ (ENV/JM/MONO(2010)2312), in particular 25 and 86–87 (explaining how Codex Maximum Residue Levels are incorporated into national regulations)
- 6.
RH Steinberg, ‘The Hidden World of WTO Governance: A Reply to Andrew Lang and Joanne Scott’ (2009) 20 EJIL 1063, 1071.
- 7.
See respectively M Trebilcock and J Soloway, ‘International Trade Policy and Domestic Food Safety Regulation: The Case for Substantial Deference by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body under the SPS Agreement’ in DLM Kennedy and JD Southwick (eds), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honour of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge, CUP, 2002) 549–552 and VR Walker, ‘Keeping the WTO from Becoming the “World Trans-Science Organisation”: Scientific Uncertainty, Science Policy, and Fact-Finding in the Growth Hormones Dispute’ (1998) 31 Cornell International Law Journal 251, 281.
- 8.
J Bohanes, ‘Risk Regulation in WTO Law: A Procedure-Based Approach to the Precautionary Principle’ (2002) 40 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 323, 376–399.
- 9.
D Livshiz, ‘Updating American Administrative Law: WTO, International Standards, Domestic Implementation and Public Participation’ (2007) 24 Wisconsin International Law Journal 961.
- 10.
See MA Livermore, ‘Authority and Legitimacy in Global Governance: Deliberation, Institutional Differentiation, and the Codex Alimentarius’ (2006) 81 New York University Law Review 766, 795–96; T Hüller and ML Maier, ‘Fixing the Codex? Global Food-Safety Governance under Review’ in C Joerges and E-U Petersmann (eds), Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade Governance and Social Regulation (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2006) s IV.
- 11.
De Búrca, herself impressed it would seem by the ultimately fallacious claims surrounding the Codex Guidelines on vitamin and mineral supplements, points to popular opposition as a driver of reform. G De Búrca, ‘Developing Democracy beyond the State’ 46 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 221, 240 (2008). Of course, it may be argued that the perception of illegitimacy well founded or not, is sufficient to justify reform of the body.
- 12.
For a recent example of this type of research is H Horn, PC Mavroidis and EN Wijkstrom, ‘In the Shadow of the DSU: Addressing Specific Trade Concerns in the WTO SPS and TBT Committees’ (2013) 47 JWT 729.
References
Bohanes J, ‘Risk Regulation in WTO Law: A Procedure-Based Approach to the Precautionary Principle’ (2002) 40 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 323.
De Búrca G, ‘Developing Democracy beyond the State’ 46 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 221, 240 (2008).
Horn H, Mavroidis PC and Wijkstrom EN, ‘In the Shadow of the DSU: Addressing Specific Trade Concerns in the WTO SPS and TBT Committees’ (2013) 47 JWT 729.
Hüller T and Maier ML, ‘Fixing the Codex? Global Food-Safety Governance under Review’ in C Joerges and E-U Petersmann (eds), Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade Governance and Social Regulation (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2006).
Livermore MA, ‘Authority and Legitimacy in Global Governance: Deliberation, Institutional Differentiation, and the Codex Alimentarius’ (2006) 81 New York University Law Review 766.
Livshiz D, ‘Updating American Administrative Law: WTO, International Standards, Domestic Implementation and Public Participation’ (2007) 24 Wisconsin International Law Journal 961.
Steinberg RH, ‘The Hidden World of WTO Governance: A Reply to Andrew Lang and Joanne Scott’ (2009) 20 EJIL 1063.
Trebilcock M and Soloway J, ‘International Trade Policy and Domestic Food Safety Regulation: The Case for Substantial Deference by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body under the SPS Agreement’ in DLM Kennedy and JD Southwick (eds), The Political Economy of International Trade Law: Essays in Honour of Robert E. Hudec (Cambridge, CUP, 2002).
Walker VR, ‘Keeping the WTO from Becoming the “World Trans-Science Organisation”: Scientific Uncertainty, Science Policy, and Fact-Finding in the Growth Hormones Dispute’ (1998) 31 Cornell International Law Journal 251.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Downes, C. (2014). Conclusion. In: The Impact of WTO SPS Law on EU Food Regulations. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04373-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04373-9_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04372-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04373-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)