The Burden of Proof in National Treatment Disputes and the Environment
AbstractThe basic legal instrument in the WTO Agreement regulating domestic environmental policies is the GATT National Treatment (NT) provision. The practical ambit of this clause is largely determined by the allocation of the burden of proof (BoP) in NT disputes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of this burden for trade liberalization and for the environment, in a situation where imports may cause environmental damage. The paper finds that there may be a tension between NT and environmental concerns, but that this is not likely to arise in the context of severe threats to the environment. In any event, relieving regulating countries of the BoP will have fundamentally unclear implications for the environment.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Research Institute of Industrial Economics in its series Working Paper Series with number 791.
Length: 34 pages
Date of creation: 02 Mar 2009
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Developing Countries in the WTO Legal System, Thomas, Chantal, Trachtman, Joel (eds.), 2009, pages 1-1, Oxford University Press.
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Research Institute of Industrial Economics, Box 55665, SE-102 15 Stockholm, Sweden
Phone: +46 8 665 4500
Fax: +46 8 665 4599
Web page: http://www.ifn.se/
More information through EDIRC
National treatment; Burden of proof; Environment; GATT; WTO; Trade agreements;
Other versions of this item:
- Horn, Henrik, 2009. "The Burden of Proof in National Treatment Disputes and the Environment," CEPR Discussion Papers 7316, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
- Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Baksi, S. & Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2008.
"Transboundary Pollution, Trade Liberalization and Environmental Taxes,"
2008-033, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
- Baksi, S. & Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2008. "Transboundary Pollution, Trade Liberalization, and Environmental Taxes," Discussion Paper 2008-78, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Ferrara, Ida & Missios, Paul & Murat Yildiz, Halis, 2009. "Trading rules and the environment: Does equal treatment lead to a cleaner world?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 206-225, September.
- Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 1998.
"An economic theory of GATT,"
15, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Kamal Saggi & Nese Sara, 2008. "National Treatment At The Wto: The Roles Of Product And Country Heterogeneity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1365-1394, November.
- Chris William Sanchirico, 2008. "A Primary-Activity Approach to Proof Burdens," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 273-313, 01.
- Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2009. "Burden of Proof in Environmental Disputes in the WTO: Legal Aspects," Working Paper Series 793, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
- Sumeet Gulati & Devesh Roy, 2008. "National Treatment and the optimal regulation of environmental externalities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1445-1471, November.
- Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2008. "The Permissible Reach of National Environmental Policies," Working Paper Series 739, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 20 Jun 2008.
- Shin, Hyun Song, 1997.
"Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in Arbitration,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1722, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Hyun Song Shin, 1998. "Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in Arbitration," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 378-405, Summer.
- Song Shin, H, 1996. "Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in Arbitration," Economics Papers 124, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Henrik Horn, 2006.
"National Treatment in the GATT,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 394-404, March.
- Giovanni Maggi & Robert W. Staiger, 2008. "On the Role and Design of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 14067, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Grossman, Gene M. & Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2012. "The Legal and Economic Principles of World Trade Law: National Treatment," Working Paper Series 917, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Elisabeth Gustafsson).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.