IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jieclw/v2y1999i4p641-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures as Applied in the First Three SPS Disputes: EC--Hormones, Australia--Salmon and Japan--Varietals

Author

Listed:
  • Pauwelyn, Joost

Abstract

One of the new WTO agreements that panels and the Appellate Body had to deal with in a number of recent disputes is the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures. This article focuses on the legal principles of the SPS Agreement as interpreted and established by Appellate Body and panel jurisprudence in the two most prominent cases under the SPS Agreement, the EC-Hormones case and the Australia-Salmon case, as well as the recently concluded Japan-Varietals case. Substantive rights and obligations such as scope of application, scientific evidence, risk assessment and the factors to be looked at in assessing risk, provisional measures, the acceptable level of risk for WTO Members, non-discrimination under Articles 2.3 and 5.5 SPS, and measures in the presence of international standards are examined. The above-mentioned cases also involved a number of procedural issues with particular relevance to disputes on SPS measures, such as the panel's terms of reference, the burden of proving whether a risk exists, the extent of a panel's investigation and the role of scientific experts. The status of implementation of reports is also briefly addressed. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Pauwelyn, Joost, 1999. "The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures as Applied in the First Three SPS Disputes: EC--Hormones, Australia--Salmon and Japan--Varietals," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(4), pages 641-664, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jieclw:v:2:y:1999:i:4:p:641-64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Douglas Crawford‐Brown & Joost Pauwelyn & Kelly Smith, 2004. "Environmental Risk, Precaution, and Scientific Rationality in the Context of WTO/NAFTA Trade Rules," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 461-469, April.
    2. John C. Beghin & Miet Maertens & Johan Swinnen, 2017. "Nontariff Measures and Standards in Trade and Global Value Chains," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 2, pages 13-38, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Prema‐Chandra Athukorala & Sisira Jayasuriya, 2003. "Food Safety Issues, Trade and WTO Rules: A Developing Country Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(9), pages 1395-1416, September.
    4. Maier, Matthias Leonhard, 2007. "Normentwicklung durch WTO-Gremien am Beispiel von Handel und Gesundheitsschutz: der SPS-Ausschuss," TranState Working Papers 68, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    5. Margolis, Michael & Shogren, Jason F. & Fischer, Carolyn, 2005. "How trade politics affect invasive species control," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 305-313, February.
    6. Christophe Charlier & Michel Rainelli, 2002. "Hormones, Risk Management, Precaution and Protectionism: An Analysis of the Dispute on Hormone-Treated Beef between the European Union and the United States," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 83-97, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Gerstetter, Christiane & Maier, Matthias Leonhard, 2005. "Risk regulation, trade and international law: debating the precautionary principle in and around the WTO," TranState Working Papers 18, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    9. Hartigan, James C. & McMahon, Joseph A., 2022. "A fuzzy look at a fuzzy agreement: Risk management under the WTO SPS Agreement," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 272-284.
    10. Low, Patrick & Marceau, Gabrielle & Reinaud, Julia, 2011. "The interface between the trade and climate change regimes: Scoping the issues," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2011-01, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    11. Tanner, Carolyn, 2001. "Quarantine Reform and Technical Market Access," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 125976, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. John C. Beghin & Miet Maertens & Johan Swinnen, 2017. "Nontariff Measures and Standards in Trade and Global Value Chains," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 2, pages 13-38 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Kramb, Marc Christopher, 2001. "Die Entscheidungen des Dispute Settlement-Verfahrens der WTO im Hormonstreit zwischen der EU und den USA: Implikationen für den zukünftigen Umgang mit dem SPS-Abkommen," Discussion Papers 3, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Center for international Development and Environmental Research (ZEU).
    14. Andy Thorpe & Catherine Robinson, 2004. "When goliaths clash: US and EU differences over the labeling of food products derived from genetically modified organisms," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 21(4), pages 287-298, January.
    15. JINJI Naoto, 2009. "An Economic Theory of the SPS Agreement," Discussion papers 09033, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jieclw:v:2:y:1999:i:4:p:641-64. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiel .

    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.