Non-automatic import licensing, quotas, prohibitions, quantity-control measures and other restrictions not including phytosanitary measures or measures relating to technical barriers to trade

2019 ◽  
pp. 23-31
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Control Measures ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Quantity Control

Streamlining Non-tariff Measures for Agri-food Trade in ASEAN

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (04) ◽  
pp. 60-77
Author(s):  
Sithanonxay SUVANNAPHAKDY
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Food Trade ◽  
Quantity Control ◽  
The Impact

Streamlining non-tariff measures (NTMs) plays an important role in improving market access for trade in goods among ASEAN-10 countries. An assessment of the impact of NTMs in ASEAN reveals that the agri-food trade has been constrained by contingent trade protective measures, quantity-control measures, technical barriers to trade (TBT), and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. The proliferation of SPS and TBT measures, coupled with their severe effects, suggests the need to accelerate NTM reforms in ASEAN.

scholarly journals The Impact of Structure Similarity of Nontariff Measures on Agricultural Trade

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (24) ◽  
pp. 10545
Author(s):  
Sung Ju Cho ◽  
Saera Oh ◽  
Sang Hyeon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Gravity Model ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Structure Similarity ◽  
Regulatory Harmonization ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
The Impact

This study quantifies the structure similarity of nontariff measures between countries and estimates its impact on bilateral agricultural trade using a structural gravity model. The findings show that a similar structure of technical barriers to trade (TBT) between countries is likely to expand their bilateral trade. However, a similar structure of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) is shown to have negative impacts on agricultural trade. We also discuss the effects of regulatory harmonization on sustainable development.

TTIP Regulatory Cooperation

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-268
Author(s):  
Alexia Herwig
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Detailed Explanation ◽  
Regulatory Cooperation ◽  
The Us ◽  
Regulatory Measures ◽  
Regulatory Coordination ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
The Eu

The leaked TTIP documents reveal that the EU and US are discussing the introduction of a detailed set of procedural requirements for the adoption of regulatory measures. Default provisions are set forth in the chapter on regulatory cooperation, applicable to goods and services. More specific provisions are being negotiated in the chapters on technical barriers to trade and on sanitary and phytosanitary measures. If they conflict with the regulatory cooperation chapter, they prevail.This article analyses the regulatory cooperation chapter insofar as it pertains to trade in goods but to the exclusion of SPS matters and anything provided in the TBT chapter itself. The questions this article examines are to what extent the TTIP proposals expand upon the obligations the two parties have already taken on under WTO law and to what extent the resulting regulatory coordination is consistent withWTO law. It will be shown that the US proposals on procedure may constrain substantive regulatory discretion beyond what applies under the GATT and TBT Agreement of the WTO. It will alsobe shown that the needs to conduct trade impact assessments and a detailed explanation of the necessity of measures anticipate a legal challenge to necessity and will provide information of much use to complainants in meeting their burden of proof.

scholarly journals Implications of Biosecurity in Food Safety

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-219
Author(s):  
Vijai Pal ◽  
Nagesh Tripathi ◽  
Ajay Kumar Goel
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Food Production ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
World Trade Organisation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Large Populations ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Large Crop

Owing to growing population of world, efforts are being made to maximise food production. Food safety should not be compromised to meet the food requirement of increasing population. Biosecurity is the imperative approach to ensure food safety. This is a holistic approach that interlinks health, environment, security and trade. Increased incidents of foodborne diseases led to promotion of biosecurity as a major priority policy worldwide to curtail such incidents and ensure food safety. Microbial risk management is an essential component of food safety. National biosecurity programmes are essentially required to identify the prospective modes of introduction and spread of a disease in a country or region and to specify the control measures to curtail the risk associated with the disease. International standards for various biosecurity sectors are set mainly by Codex Alimentarius Commission, the World Organisation for Animal Health and Commission on Phytosanitary Measures, which are implemented through the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement, 1995 of World Trade Organisation. Agricultural biosecurity is of utmost importance in the countries that are large crop and animal producers, and these countries are at risk from alien pests and pathogens. Adequate biosecurity programmes are essential in all the countries to protect global environment, agriculture and biodiversity. Developing countries, particularly with large populations aiming maximised food production require stringent biosecurity approaches to provide safe and nutritious food to the people.

Global Public Policy and the World Trade Organization after Shrimp/Turtle and Asbestos

2005 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 253-352
Author(s):  
Maureen Irish
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Appellate Body ◽  
The World ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Global Public Policy

SummaryRecent decisions of the Appellate Body of the WTO deal with the interpretation of GATT Article XX, which provides exemptions from trade obligations for important non-trade policies such as the protection of health and the environment. The article discusses those decisions, as well as the balance between trade and non-trade interests in the provisions of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.

scholarly journals The WTO Seal Products Case: Doctrinal and Normative Confusion

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 323-327
Author(s):  
Joel Trachtman
Keyword(s):  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Uruguay Round ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
The World ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Basic Ideas ◽  
Domestic Regulation

The negotiators and drafters of the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization(WTO), which includes the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947(GATT) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT), as well as other subagreements dealing with domestic regulation, such as the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures(SPS), did not do a great job of doctrinal integration among the different documents that comprise the WTO Agreement. To be fair, at the end of the Uruguay Round, the hour was late and they may have felt that the basic ideas were sufficiently clear that it could all be sorted out in litigation. But in several contexts, including within the original GATT, the text of which dates from 1947, they covered the same ground in multiple places, without stating clearly how the different norms relate to one another,and without articulating plausible reasons for different treatment. For example, why is different language used for national treatment in three different places within Article III of GATT, and why is that language different from the language that appearsto have the same purpose in the TBT Agreement or in the SPS Agreement?

scholarly journals Interval Estimation of the Tariff Equivalent of Technical Barriers to Trade in the Case of Japan^|^rsquo;s Phytosanitary Measures against Fire Blight in Imported Apples

2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-103
Author(s):  
Tomoaki Nakatani ◽  
Ayumi Miyata ◽  
Daisuke Sawauchi ◽  
Takahiro Sajiki ◽  
Yasutaka Yamamoto
Keyword(s):  
Fire Blight ◽  
Interval Estimation ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Tariff Equivalent

scholarly journals The Ignored: Indirect Protection through the TBT, the SPS, the ADA, the AoA, and the Special Treatment Clause

2019 ◽  
pp. 131-160
Author(s):  
Charlotte E. Blattner
Keyword(s):  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Special Treatment ◽  
Technical Barriers To Trade ◽  
Preferential Treatment ◽  
Animal Law ◽  
Majority World ◽  
Phytosanitary Measures ◽  
Import Restrictions ◽  
Agreement On Agriculture ◽  
Indirect Protection

Chapter 4 complements Chapter 3 by examining the means available for states to indirectly protect animals abroad under trade agreements dealing with technical barriers, sanitary measures, dumping, agriculture, and special treatment for majority world countries. It opens with a discussion of the indirect extraterritorial reach of labels and import restrictions under the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and then determines if the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) leaves room for protecting animals through indirect extraterritorial means. This chapter also explores the most appropriate way for members to react to dumping in animal law under the Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA). Finally, it examines how states can use the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) and the Special Treatment Clause to indirectly improve the lives of animals abroad through special schemes for subsidies or preferential treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document