Mapping bias: A rhizomatic critique of the National Literacy Panel Report

Abstract This paper analyzes the Australia – Anti-Dumping Measures on A4 Copy Paper panel report, the second recent WTO dispute to involve a challenge to Indonesia's paper industry. The Indonesian paper industry benefits from reduced-cost inputs because of the Indonesian government's influence and subsidies over the timber and pulp market. The report offers the first interpretation of ‘particular market situation’ under Article 2.2 of the WTO's Anti-Dumping Agreement. At the same time, it raises questions regarding the appropriateness of using anti-dumping measures to address what are fundamentally subsidy issues. While the panel ultimately found that Australia's measure was inconsistent with Article 2.2, the paper shows that the panel's interpretation of ‘particular market situation’ increases the relative attractiveness of using anti-dumping duties instead of countervailing measures. Two key points on the welfare implications of the decision can be made. The first relates to the motivations of the Australian paper industry and the imperfectly competitive market in which Australian Paper operates. The second is the importance of challenging subsidies rather than imposing anti-dumping duties where the subsidies in question have negative environmental effects.

Download Full-text

Amended Safety Assessment of Fatty Acyl Sarcosines and Sarcosinate Salts as Used in Cosmetics

International Journal of Toxicology ◽

10.1177/10915818211023881 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 109158182110238

Author(s):

Monice M. Fiume ◽

Wilma F. Bergfeld ◽

Donald V. Belsito ◽

Ronald A. Hill ◽

Curtis D. Klaassen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Safety Assessment ◽

Expert Panel ◽

Fatty Acyl ◽

Nitroso Compounds ◽

Acyl Residue ◽

Cosmetic Products ◽

Panel Report ◽

Fatty Acyl Residue

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 5 acyl sarcosines and 9 sarcosinate salts as used in cosmetics; all of these ingredients are reported to function in cosmetics as hair conditioning agents and most also can function as surfactants—cleansing agents. The ingredients reviewed in this assessment are composed of an amide comprising a fatty acyl residue and sarcosine and are either free acids or simple salts thereof. The Panel relied on relevant new data, including concentration of use, and considered data from the previous Panel report, such as the reaction of sarcosine with oxidizing materials possibly resulting in nitrosation and the formation of N-nitrososarcosine. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics when formulated to be non-irritating, but these ingredients should not be used in cosmetic products in which N-nitroso compounds may be formed.

Download Full-text

European Communities —Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products. WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, & WT/DS293/R

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0002930000030177 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 101 (2) ◽

pp. 453-459

Author(s):

Daniel Bodansky ◽

Simon Lester

Keyword(s):

World Trade ◽

Dispute Settlement ◽

Genetically Modified Organisms ◽

The United States ◽

Regulatory Regime ◽

Panel Report ◽

Wto Dispute Settlement ◽

Production And Consumption ◽

Phytosanitary Measures ◽

Biotech Products

European Communities—Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products. WT/DS291/R, WT/DS292/R, & WT/DS293/R. At <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm>.World Trade Organization Panel, September 29, 2006 (adopted November 21, 2006).In what was by far the longest panel report in the World Trade Organization’s history, a WTO panel ruled last September that various parts of the European Communities’ regulatory regime for the approval and marketing of “biotech products” (that is, products that contain, or are made from or with, genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) violated the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). The panel report was not appealed and was adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body on November 21, 2006.In recent years, a heated international debate has developed regarding the production and consumption of food made from or with GMOs. Among the key players in this debate, the United States, supported by many companies who have developed GMO-based products, has pushed for their acceptance; by contrast, the European Communities (EC) and its member states, backed by consumer groups and other activists, have tried to restrict their use through various regulations.

Download Full-text