IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bjafio/v15y2017i1p17n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Approaches to Set Rules for Trade in the Products of Agricultural Biotechnology. Is Harmonization under Trans-Pacific Partnership Possible?

Author

Listed:
  • Viju Crina

    (Institute of European, Russian and Eurasian Studies, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada)

  • Kerr William A

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada)

  • Smyth Stuart

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada)

Abstract

Given the absence of progress toward a multilateral agreement on trade liberalization in the WTO’s Doha Round, countries are attempting to gain the perceived gains from trade through the negotiation of preferential trade agreements. One of the most ambitious attempts to negotiate a preferential agreement is the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) which encompasses 12 countries across the Pacific including both the US and Japan. The TPP members account for approximately 40 % of global GDP. One of the most difficult issues in current international trade policy is the regulation of trade in the products of modern agricultural biotechnology. This question was on the negotiating agenda of the TPP. The objective of this paper is to lay out the major issues in the trade of products of modern agricultural biotechnology and examines the regulatory regimes for biotechnology in the 12 TPP countries. It finds that there is a significant divergence in the approaches to regulating genetically modified organisms (GMOs) across the TPP countries. As a result, the development of a harmonized regulatory regime to govern trade in GMOs was impossible directly in the TPP. A forum where the development of a harmonized system could potentially be undertaken was, however, agreed in the TPP.

Suggested Citation

  • Viju Crina & Kerr William A & Smyth Stuart, 2017. "Approaches to Set Rules for Trade in the Products of Agricultural Biotechnology. Is Harmonization under Trans-Pacific Partnership Possible?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bjafio:v:15:y:2017:i:1:p:17:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/jafio-2016-0016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2016-0016
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jafio-2016-0016?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kerr, William A., 2015. "Governance of International Trade in Genetically Modified Organisms: Is Future Global Food Security at Risk?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18.
    2. William A. Kerr, 2010. "What is New in Protectionism? Consumers, Cranks, and Captives," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 58(1), pages 5-22, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nakuja, Tekuni & Kerr, William A., 2013. "Was Food Safety Declining?: Assessing the Justification for the US Food Safety Modernisation Act," Commissioned Papers 145969, Canadian Agricultural Trade Policy Research Network.
    2. Smyth Stuart & Kerr William & Phillips Peter, 2017. "Labeling Demands, Coexistence and the Challenges for Trade," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, January.
    3. Brandon R. McFadden & Lawton Lanier Nalley & Alvaro Durand-Morat & Wei Yang & Katie Loethen, 2024. "Potential response of Mexican consumers to a Ban on genetically modified Maize imports," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 16(5), pages 1301-1311, October.
    4. Kerr, William A., 2012. "The EU-Canada Free Trade Agreement: What is on the Table for Agriculture?," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135067, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Hobbs, Jill E., 2010. "Public and Private Standards for Food Safety and Quality: International Trade Implications," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Moon, Wanki & Saldias, Gabriel Pino, 2013. "Public Preferences about Agricultural Protectionism in the US," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150718, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Kerr, William A., 2016. "Disequilibrium, Trade and the Consequenses of Adjustment," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 17(2), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Kerr, William A., 2017. "Genomics, International Trade and Food Security," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 18(2), December.
    9. Kerr. William Alexander, 2022. "he Rules of Trade in the Face of Long Running Disequilibrium," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 23(1), June.
    10. Moon, Wanki & Sakuyama, Takumi, 2021. "The Political Economy of Agricultural Trade Policy in Northeast Asia: Comparisons with the West and between Japan and Korea," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315192, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Wanki Moon & Gabriel Pino, 2018. "Do U.S. citizens support government intervention in agriculture? Implications for the political economy of agricultural protection," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 119-129, January.
    12. Smyth, Stuart & Kerr, William A. & Phillips, Peter, 2010. "The Incompatibility of Science and Trade at the International Level," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188113, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    13. Kerr, William A., 2015. "Governance of International Trade in Genetically Modified Organisms: Is Future Global Food Security at Risk?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18.
    14. Gleim, Savannah & Smyth, Stuart J. & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2016. "Regulatory System Impacts on Global GM Crop Adoption Patterns," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 17(2), pages 1-21, December.
    15. Stuart Smyth & William Kerr & Peter W. B. Phillips, 2015. "The Unintended Consequences of Technological Change: Winners and Losers from GM Technologies and the Policy Response in the Organic Food Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-17, June.

    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:bpj:bjafio:v:15:y:2017:i:1:p:17:n:2. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.