IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v24y2024i4d10.1007_s10784-024-09649-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling the Incongruence between the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the GATT/WTO Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Nsikan-Abasi Odong

    (The University of Ottawa)

Abstract

The increasing emphasis on environmental protection and/or conservation, over the past decades, which could be measured by the rise in the number of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) in force, seems to bring to the fore the trade and environmental protection conflict. One MEA that highlights the conflict between trade and environment is the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity (Biosafety Protocol)—an MEA regulating the movement of Living Modified Organisms (LMOs). The article exposes the inherent conflict between trade and environment as exemplified by the seeming tension between the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and the Biosafety Protocol. This article appraises the trade-restrictive provisions of the Biosafety Protocol vis-à-vis the GATT/WTO rules and exposes the incongruence between both instruments. The article therefore seeks to answer the following questions: (I) what are the inherent conflicts between the Biosafety Protocol and the GATT/WTO rules? (II) how could the conflicts be addressed in a way that preserves the sanctity of the Biosafety Protocol? The Article finds that there is tension between the 2 regimes and that the tension would be more pronounced when national measures are adopted by countries to implement the Biosafety Protocol. The Article also finds that the means to avoid the conflict between the 2 regimes could be by strategically interpreting the trade-restrictive provisions of the Biosafety Protocol and subsequent national measures developed upon the Biosafety Protocol’s foundation, to prevail over and/or be regarded as exceptions to the GATT/WTO rules and the chapeau to Article XX of the GATT, 1994.

Suggested Citation

  • Nsikan-Abasi Odong, 2024. "Reconciling the Incongruence between the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the GATT/WTO Rules," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 497-513, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09649-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-024-09649-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-024-09649-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-024-09649-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Winham, Gilbert R., 2003. "International regime conflict in trade and environment: the Biosafety Protocol and the WTO," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 131-155, July.
    2. Kerr, William A., 2015. "Governance of International Trade in Genetically Modified Organisms: Is Future Global Food Security at Risk?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Smyth Stuart & Kerr William & Phillips Peter, 2017. "Labeling Demands, Coexistence and the Challenges for Trade," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, January.
    2. Brandon R. McFadden & Lawton Lanier Nalley & Alvaro Durand-Morat & Wei Yang & Katie Loethen, 2024. "Potential response of Mexican consumers to a Ban on genetically modified Maize imports," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 16(5), pages 1301-1311, October.
    3. Gerstetter, Christiane & Maier, Matthias Leonhard, 2005. "Risk regulation, trade and international law: debating the precautionary principle in and around the WTO," TranState Working Papers 18, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    4. Thomas Gehring & Benjamin Faude, 2014. "A theory of emerging order within institutional complexes: How competition among regulatory international institutions leads to institutional adaptation and division of labor," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 471-498, December.
    5. Viju Crina & Kerr William A & Smyth Stuart, 2017. "Approaches to Set Rules for Trade in the Products of Agricultural Biotechnology. Is Harmonization under Trans-Pacific Partnership Possible?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Kerr, William A., 2017. "Genomics, International Trade and Food Security," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 18(2), December.

    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:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09649-7. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.