Advertisement

Scope and Limitations for National Food Safety and Labeling Regimes in the WTO-Frame

  • Bettina Rudloff
Part of the Sustainability and Innovation book series (SUSTAINABILITY)

Keywords

Fire Blight Private Label Lower Middle Income Fishing Technique Bilateral Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bagwell K, Staiger R (2002) The economics of the world trading system. MIT Press, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  2. Caswell J (1997) Uses of food labeling regulations In: OECD working papers, vol.v (1997), no.100, ParisGoogle Scholar
  3. Codex Alimentarius (2003) Procedural Manual 13th edn Rome, available at ftp://ftpfaoorg/codex/PM/Manual13epdf (Dec 2004)Google Scholar
  4. EU-Chile Association (2002) Agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary as Annex IV, measures applicable to trade in animals and animal products, plants, plant products and other goods and animal welfare Available at http://europaeuint/comm/trade/issues/bilateral/countries/chile/euchlagr_enhtm (Dec 2005)Google Scholar
  5. Gandolfo G (1998) International trade theory and policy. 2nd edn Springer Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  6. Gupta A (2000) Governing trade in genetically modified organisms: the Cartagena protocol on biosafety. In: Environment 42:23–33Google Scholar
  7. Hudec R (1996) The GATT/WTO dispute settlement process: Can it reconcile trade rules and environmental needs? In: Wolfrum R (ed) Enforcing environmental standards: economic mechanisms as viable means? Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentlichen Recht und Völkerrecht, Bd 125, Duncker & Humblot, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. James S (2000) An economic analysis of food safety issues following the SPS agreement: lessons from the hormone dispute. Centre for International Economic Studies. Policy discussion paper 0005, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  9. Josling T, Roberts D, Orden D (2003) Food regulation and trade, toward a safe and open global system. Institute for International Economics, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  10. OECD (1994) Trade and environment. Process and production methods. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. Rudloff B (2003) National concerns about food safety and international trade-An economic assessment of potential conflicts about food safety matters with an application to the “Hormone-Beef Case” (In German) PhD Thesis, University of Bonn In: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Peter Lang Verlag, Reihe V, Vol 2942, Frankfurt, 309 Seiten, ISBN 3-631-39777-1Google Scholar
  12. Rudloff B, Simons J (2004) Comparing EU Free trade agreements-Sanitary and phytosanitary measures Prepared for ECDPM (InBrief), available at http://www.ecdpm.org/Web_ECDPM/Web/Content/Navigationnsf/index.htmGoogle Scholar
  13. Scott J, Vos E (2001) The juridification of uncertainty: Observations on the ambivalence of the precautionary principle within the EU and the WTO. In: Dehousse R, Joerges Ch (eds) Good governance in an integrated market. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Unnevehr L, Roberts D (2003) food safety and quality: regulations, trade, and the WTO. Invited paper presented at the International Conference “Agricultural policy reform and the WTO: where are we heading?” Capri (Italy), June 23–26 2003Google Scholar
  15. World Bank (2005) Food safety and agricultutural health standards: challenges and opportunities for developing country exports. Report No 31207: Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Trade Unit and Agriculture and Rural Development Department. World Bank, Washington DCGoogle Scholar

Cases

  1. GATT: “Feed protein Case” Support domestic feed proteins — USA against EC, Case BISD 25S/49, March 1978Google Scholar
  2. GATT: “Wood Case” Tariffs on certain woods — Canada against Japan, Case BISD 36S/167, July 1989Google Scholar
  3. GATT: “Tuna Case 1” Restrictions on tuna import-Mexico against USA, Case DS21/R-359, 1991Google Scholar
  4. WTO (1995) Agreement on agriculture. Available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/14-ag.pdf (December 2005)Google Scholar
  5. WTO (1995) Agreement on rules of origin. Available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/22-roo.pdf (December 2005)Google Scholar
  6. WTO (1995) Agreement on technical barriers to trade. Available at http://www.wto.org /english/docs_e/legal_e/17-tbt.pdf (December 2005)Google Scholar
  7. WTO (1995) Agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures Available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/15-sps.pdf (December 2005)Google Scholar
  8. WTO (1995) Agreement on the understanding on rules and procedures governing the settlement of Disputes. Available at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/28-dsu.pdf (December 2005)Google Scholar
  9. WTO: “Salmon Case” Measures affecting the importation of Salmon-Canada against Australia, Case WT/DS18, June 1998Google Scholar
  10. WTO: “Hormone Case 1” Measures concerning meat and meat products — USA against EC, Case WT/DS26, August 1997Google Scholar
  11. WTO: “Hormone Case 2” Measures concerning meat and meat products — Canada against EC, Case WT/DS48, August 1997Google Scholar
  12. WTO: “Sea turtle case” Import prohibition on certain shrimps and shrimp products — United States against Carribean States, Case WT/DS58, May 1998Google Scholar
  13. WTO: “Fruit and Vegetable Case” Measures affecting agricultural products-USA against Japan, Case WT/DS76, October 1998Google Scholar
  14. WTO: “Asbestos Case” Measures affecting asbestos and products containing asbestos — Canada against EC, Case WT/DS135, September 2000Google Scholar
  15. WTO: “Sardine Case” Trade description of sardines — Peru against EC, Case WT/DS231, May 2002Google Scholar
  16. WTO: “Apple Case” Measures affecting the importation of apples — USA against Japan, Case WT/DS245, July 2003Google Scholar
  17. WTO: “Batteries Case” Request for consultations-Bangladesh against India, Case WT/DS306, January 2004Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bettina Rudloff
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Food and Resource EconomicsUniversity of BonnGermany

Personalised recommendations