IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Transparency of Complex Regulation: How Should WTO Trade Policy Reviews Deal with Sanitary and Phytosanitary Policies?

Listed author(s):
  • Zahrnt, Valentin

Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures that protect human, animal, and plant health are impeding trade and provoking high-profile disputes. This paper argues that the WTO’s Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) could play an important role in defusing the trade-disrupting potential of SPS regulation. The most promising avenue is to review in greater detail the policy-making procedures that lead to SPS measures. How transparent and independent are countries’ risk assessments of health hazards? Which provisions have countries taken to account for trade effects when selecting SPS measures? Do countries give foreign interests adequate possibility to voice their concerns over proposed SPS regulation? If reviews motivate countries to improve their policy-making processes, this will contribute to making SPS regulation less trade restrictive and more effective in protecting health. To reach this objective, special trade policy reviews dedicated exclusively to SPS regulation would have to be introduced as a complement to the current reviews of countries’ overall trade policies. Such a move could serve as a model for establishing further issue-specific reviews that address technical barriers to trade, trade in services, and other complex regulatory challenges.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE) in its series ECIPE Working Papers with number 50365.

in new window

Date of creation: May 2009
Handle: RePEc:ags:ecipwp:50365
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Rue Belliard 4-6, 1040 Brussels

Phone: +32 (0)2 289 1350
Fax: +32 (0)2 289 1359
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ecipwp:50365. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.