IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iatrwp/14594.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Biotechnology Regulations And The Wto

Author

Listed:
  • Sheldon, Ian M.
  • Josling, Timothy E.

Abstract

This paper examines the regulation of trade in genetically modified organisms (GMOs) by the World Trade Organization (WTO). Despite rapid adoption of GMOs by a few exporters, many importers have developed relatively restrictive procedures for pre-market approval of GMOs, and are introducing mandatory labeling. While exporters have yet to seek a ruling from the WTO on these regulations, a trade dispute over GMOs is likely to occur before too long. Exporting countries will likely argue that importing countries' regulations are too restrictive, given existing scientific knowledge of the safety of current GM crops, and that labeling of GM foods is unnecessary due to the fact that they are typically similar to their conventional counterparts. In response, importing countries will likely argue that existing scientific knowledge about GMOs is insufficient, and that a precautionary approach to approval is appropriate. In addition, importers will claim that labeling is necessary due to the fact that they are not equivalent to their conventional counterparts, and consumers have a right to choose whether or not consume such foods, be it for religious, ethical or other reasons. In the event a panel will have decide on whether GM and non-GM products are "like goods", whether adequate risk assessment was undertaken for any regulation introduced for health reasons, whether labels constitute the "least trade distorting" way of meeting legitimate objectives, and whether regulations imply discrimination among suppliers or in favor of domestic producers. Experience with the SPS and TBT Agreements has not been extensive enough to indicate how such a panel might rule. But one can also view the issue in broader trade policy terms, as a balance between market access obligations that need to be adjusted as domestic regulations on new technologies are developed. A possible solution is for importing countries with tough GM regulation and mandatory labeling to offer reciprocal increases in market access for non-GM foods in compensation for any losses of market access for GM foods. There is a question though of whether such "rebalancing" is actually practical, and it would certainly add to the costs of dispute settlement in the WTO, but it may be the only viable solution in the long run if the WTO is not to be dragged in to evaluating social and ethical bases for regulation of biotechnology.

Suggested Citation

  • Sheldon, Ian M. & Josling, Timothy E., 2002. "Biotechnology Regulations And The Wto," Working Papers 14594, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iatrwp:14594
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.14594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/14594/files/wp0202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.14594?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Domestic Policies, National Sovereignty, and International Economic Institutions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 519-562.
    2. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    3. Roberts, Donna, 1998. "Preliminary Assessment of the Effects of the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Trade Regulations," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 377-405, September.
    4. Perdikis, Nicholas, 2000. "A Conflict of Legitimate Concerns or Pandering to Vested Interests? Conflicting Attitudes Towards the Regulation of Trade in Genetically Modified Goods - The EU and the US," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 1(1), pages 1-15.
    5. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "The WTO as a Mechanism for Securing Market Access Property Rights: Implications for Global Labor and Environmental Issues," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    6. Christian Gollier, 2001. "Should we beware of the Precautionary Principle?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 16(33), pages 302-327.
    7. Paul B. Thompson, 2000. "Grades and standards in the context of international trade: some ethical considerations," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 55, pages 53-70.
    8. Daniel Esty, 1994. "Greening the GATT: Trade, Environment, and the Future," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 40, October.
    9. Gollier, Christian & Jullien, Bruno & Treich, Nicolas, 2000. "Scientific progress and irreversibility: an economic interpretation of the 'Precautionary Principle'," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 229-253, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. James Rude & Karl D. Meilke, 2002. "Two Unknowns and No Equations: Implications of the Doha Declaration for Canadian Agricultural Policy," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(4), pages 415-437, December.
    2. Kym Anderson & Lee Ann Jacskon, 2004. "GM Food Crop Technology and Trade Measures: Some Economic Implications for Australia and New Zealand," Centre for International Economic Studies Working Papers 2004-08, University of Adelaide, Centre for International Economic Studies.
    3. Colyer, Dale, 2004. "Environmental Provisions in Trade Agreements," Conference Papers 19103, West Virginia University, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics.
    4. MacLaren, Donald, 2003. "Consumers’ Preferences, Credence Goods And The Wto Sps Agreement," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57915, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. James O. Bukenya & Natasha R. Wright, 2007. "Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified tomatoes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 117-130.
    6. Anderson, Kym & Jackson, Lee Ann, 2004. "GM food technology abroad and its implications for Australia and New Zealand," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58365, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Inaba, Masaru & Nutahara, Kengo, 2009. "The role of investment wedges in the Carlstrom-Fuerst economy and business cycle accounting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 200-203, December.
    2. Nuno Limão, 2018. "Trade policy, cross-border externalities and lobbies: do linked agreements enforce more cooperative outcomes?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 9, pages 257-281, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Philip I. Levy, 2003. "Non-Tariff Barriers as a Test of Political Economy Theories," Working Papers 852, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    4. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 2003. "National sovereignty in an interdependent world," Working papers 27, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    5. JINJI Naoto, 2009. "An Economic Theory of the SPS Agreement," Discussion papers 09033, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    6. Sheldon Ian, 2004. "Europe's Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology: Precaution or Trade Distortion?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-28, May.
    7. McCorriston, Steve & Sheldon, Ian M., 2002. "The Non-Neutrality Of Wto Border Tax Adjustments For Environmental Excise Taxes Under Imperfect Competition," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19673, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Giovanni Maggi & Ralph Ossa, 2020. "Are Trade Agreements Good For You?," NBER Working Papers 27252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. John Whalley, 2008. "Globalisation and Values," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(11), pages 1503-1524, November.
    10. Sturm, Daniel & Ulph, Alistair, 2002. "Environment, trade, political economy and imperfect information: a survey," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0204, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    11. Giovanni Immordino, 2003. "Looking for a Guide to Protect the Environment: The Development of the Precautionary Principle," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(5), pages 629-644, December.
    12. Obashi, Ayako, 2019. "Trade agreements with cross-border unbundling," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Ian Sheldon, 2006. "Trade and Environmental Policy: A Race to the Bottom?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 365-392, September.
    14. Laure Cabantous & Denis Hilton, 2006. "De l'aversion à l'ambiguïté aux attitudes face à l'ambiguïté. Les apports d'une perspective psychologique en économie," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(2), pages 259-280.
    15. Caroline Orset, 2014. "Innovation and the precautionary principle," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 780-801, November.
    16. Ralph Ossa, 2011. "A "New Trade" Theory of GATT/WTO Negotiations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 122-152.
    17. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 2000. "GATT-think," Working papers 19, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    18. Caroline Orset, 2017. "Innovation and The Precautionary Principle," Working Papers hal-01500845, HAL.
    19. Henrik Horn, 2006. "National Treatment in the GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 394-404, March.
    20. Wilfred J. Ethier, "undated". "Punishment and Dispute Settlement in Trade Agreements," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-14, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:iatrwp:14594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iatrcea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.