Political Precaution, Pandemics and Protectionism

Despite strong scientific evidence and representations made by international scientific organizations, a considerable number of countries have imposed import bans on pork in response to the H1N1 pandemic. The imposition of these barriers is contrary to WTO rules. The motivation for the imposition of these barriers does not appear to have arisen from producers’ requests or consumer lobbying – political precaution provides the motivation. There appears to be little control over political precaution in the rules of international trade. Hence, the balance between the strong rules of trade desired by firms wishing to engage in international commerce and the need, at times, for politicians to respond to requests for protection may be changing in favour of more protection. Keywords: H1N1, import bans, pork, precaution, protection, swine


Issue Date:
2009
Publication Type:
Journal Article
DOI and Other Identifiers:
1496-5208 (Other)
PURL Identifier:
http://purl.umn.edu/52231
Published in:
Estey Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Volume 10
Number 2
Page range:
1-14
Total Pages:
14
Series Statement:
Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy
Volume 10, Number 2, 2009, pages 1-14




 Record created 2017-04-01, last modified 2017-09-28

Fulltext:
Download fulltext
PDF

Rate this document:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Not yet reviewed)