Distrust and Barriers to International Trade in Food Products: An Analysis of the US — Poultry Dispute
The US - Poultry dispute arbitrated by the WTO, opposing China to the US, was raised by the US decision to stop equivalence regime procedures for Chinese poultry. The Panel found that this decision was not compatible with the SPS Agreement's exigencies requiring a risk assessment centered on the Chinese poultry products, and contradicted MFN obligation of the GATT 1994 Agreement. The possibility that the reasoning of the Panel in this dispute was based on the reasoning developed in earlier SPS cases suggests that this dispute doesn't provide new perspectives for SPS cases. However, considering the dispute in the context of a trust game, this paper argues that the US - Poultry case is original. It provides an interpretation showing that a risk assessment focusing on the social and institutional conditions of the implementation of a country's safety regulation should be considered a proper way to defend impeding a national equivalence regime. This conclusion is reinforced by the economic analysis of MFN treatment in the dispute.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2012|
|Date of revision:||Nov 2013|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 250, rue Albert Einstein, 06560 Valbonne|
Web page: http://www.gredeg.cnrs.fr
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- 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,"
- 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.
- Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C, 2001.
"Economic and Legal Aspects of the Most Favoured Nation Clause,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2859, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2001. "Economic and legal aspects of the Most-Favored-Nation clause," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 233-279, June.
- La Porta, Rafael, et al, 1997.
"Trust in Large Organizations,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 333-38, May.
- Fuller, Frank & Beghin, John C. & Cara, Stephane De & Fabiosa, Jacinto & Fang, Cheng & Matthey, Holger, 2002.
"China’S Accession To The Wto. What Is At Stake For Agricultural Markets?,"
2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra
173976, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
- Fuller, Frank H. & Beghin, John C. & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Fang, Cheng & Matthey, Holger & DeCara, Stephane, 2003. "China's Accession to the WTO: What is at Stake for Agricultural Markets?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 2085, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Frank H. Fuller & John C. Beghin & Stephane De Cara & Jacinto F. Fabiosa & Cheng Fang & Holger Matthey, 2001. "China's Accession to the WTO: What Is at Stake for Agricultural Markets?," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 01-wp276, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
- Frank H. Fuller & John C. Beghin & Stephane De Cara & Jacinto F. Fabiosa & Cheng Fang & Holger Matthey, 2001. "China's Accession to the WTO: What Is at Stake for Agricultural Markets?," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 01-wp276, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
- Williamson, Oliver E, 1993. "Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 453-86, April.
- Joel Sobel, 2002. "Can We Trust Social Capital?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(1), pages 139-154, March.
- Lorenz, Edward, 1999. "Trust, Contract and Economic Cooperation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 301-15, May.
- Shumei Chen, 2010. "A transatlantic comparison on poultry disputes with China: A case study of murky protectionism," Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 3(2), pages 169-184, June.
- Cox, James C., 2004. "How to identify trust and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 260-281, February.
- Harvey James, 2002. "The Trust Paradox: A Survey of Economic Inquiries Into the Nature of Trust and Trustworthiness," Microeconomics 0202001, EconWPA.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gre:wpaper:2012-02. 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: (Patrice Bougette)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.