IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/worlde/v39y2016i1p158-169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legal But Costly: An Analysis of the EU GM Regulation in the Light of the WTO Trade Dispute Between the EU and the USA

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten J. Punt
  • Justus Wesseler

Abstract

type="main" xml:id="twec12353-abs-0001"> In this study, we investigate the new European Union (EU) regulations in the light of the ruling by the World Trade Organization (WTO) panel on the trade in genetically modified crops. To this end, we describe: the basic differences in approaches between the EU and the complaining parties with regard to genetically modified crops, what the main arguments were of the complaining parties as well as the defence of the EU, what the final judgement of the panel was and finally, we describe the current EU regulations. We then analyse to what extent, the arguments and conclusions of the panel still hold regarding the new EU legislation. We find that parts of the current EU legislation, that is, the safety bans as they are currently in place, are in breach of the WTO commitments. Moreover, the new approval procedures have the potential to also break these rules, although whether or not they will, depends on how the European Commission acts. Whether or not the EU will be challenged at the WTO remains an open question, as the decision to fight before the WTO may be more costly than working out new bilateral trade agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten J. Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2016. "Legal But Costly: An Analysis of the EU GM Regulation in the Light of the WTO Trade Dispute Between the EU and the USA," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 158-169, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:39:y:2016:i:1:p:158-169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/twec.2016.39.issue-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard D. Smart & Matthias Blum & Justus Wesseler, 2017. "Trends in Approval Times for Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States and the European Union," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 182-198, February.
    2. Hartigan, James C. & McMahon, Joseph A., 2022. "A fuzzy look at a fuzzy agreement: Risk management under the WTO SPS Agreement," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 272-284.
    3. Fátima Quedas & João Ponte & Carlos Trindade & Maarten Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2016. "Special Issue on GMO Coexistence," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 15(1), pages 59-63, April.
    4. Richard Danvers Smart & Matthias Blum & Justus Wesseler, 2016. "Trends in Genetically Engineered Crops' Approval Times in the United States and the European Union," Economics Working Papers 16-03, Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast.
    5. Tagliabue, Giovanni, 2017. "“GMO” maize and public health – A case of Schumpeterian policy vs. free market in the EU," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 5(3), February.
    6. Kai Purnhagen & Justus Wesseler, 2021. "EU Regulation of New Plant Breeding Technologies and Their Possible Economic Implications for the EU and Beyond," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1621-1637, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:39:y:2016:i:1:p:158-169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0378-5920 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.