Hot Potato, Hot Potato: Regulating Products of Biotechnology by the International Community

Journal of World Trade

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 1-31

  Buckingham, Donald E ^a,b   Phillips, Peter W B ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

^c Department of Agricultural Economics   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035592485     PISSN: 10116702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1016643811860     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Adler, J.H., More Sorry Than Safe: Assessing the Precautionary Principle and the Proposed International Biosafety Protocol, Texas International Law Journal, vol. 35(2) (2000), pp. 173-205.
2. Barton, J.H., Biotechnology, the Environment and International Agricultural Trade, Georgetown International Enviromental Law Review (Fall 1996).
3. Buckingham, D. et al., The International Co-ordination of Regulatory Approaches to Products of Biotechnology (submitted to Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, June 1999). The report can be reviewed in its entirety at (1999).
4. Esty, D.C. and D. Geradin, Regulatory Co-operation, Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 3, Issue 2, (2000), pp. 235-255.
5. Gray, R., S. Malla and P.W.B. Phillips, The Effectiveness of the Research Funding in the Canola Industry, (Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food, 1999).
6. Heinemeyer, L.C., Oversight of the Release of Genetically Altered Micro-organisms: Suggestions for an International Approach, Texas International Law Journal, vol. 24(2), (1989), pp. 331-365.
7. Horlick, G., Reactions to Seattle: The Speedbump at Seattle, Journal of International Economic Law vol. 3, Issue 1, (2000), pp. 167-172.
8. Isaac, G. and P.W.B. Phillips, The Potential Impact of the Biosafety Protocol: The Agricultural Commodities Case, A Report for the Biotechnology Unit of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (Ottawa, CFIA Biotechnology Unit, March 1999).
9. James, C., Transgenic Crops World-wide: Current Situation and Future Outlook, Proceedings of the Conference on "Agricultural Biotechnology in Developing Countries: Towards Optimising the Benefits of the Poor", organised by ZEF and ISAAA, AgrEvo and DSE in Bonn, 15-16 November 1999; available at , (1999).
10. Kerr, W.A., WTO and the Environment, Chapter in J. Stabler, G. Storey and H. Michelmann (eds), Globalisation and New Agricultural Trade Rules for the 21st Century (Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Forthcoming).
11. Krebs, J., GM Food Safety: Facts, Uncertainties, and Assessment, Final report on the OECD Edinburgh conference on the scientific and health aspects of genetically modified foods. Available at (2000).
12. Maher, L., Environmental Concerns in Domestic and International Regulatory Frameworks for Biotechnology, Law/Technology, vol. 24(1), pp. 1-59 (1991).
13. Majone, G., Interdependence vs. Accountability: Non-Majoritarian Institutions and Democratic Government in Europe, EUI Working Paper SPS 94é3, (San Domenico di Fiesole, European University Institute, 1994).
14. Mulongoy, K., Different Perceptions on the International Biosafety Protocol, Biotechnology and Development, No. 31. (June 1997).
15. Phillips, P.W.B. and D. Buckingham, Agricultural Biotechnology, the Environment and International Trade Regulation: Your Place or Mine, Chapter in J. Stabler, G. Storey and H. Michelmann (eds), Globalisation and New Agricultural Trade Rules for the 21st Century (Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Forthcoming).
16. Phillips, P.W.B. and H. Foster, Labelling for GM Foods: Theory and Practice, proceedings of the ICABR conference, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", (August, 2000).
17. Phillips, P.W.B., O. Henry and T. Porter, Standards in Emerging Biodiverse Industries: Western Canadian Agri-food Interests in the Canadian Standards Strategy, study prepared for Western Economic Diversification, (June, 2000).
18. Phillips, P.W.B. and S. Smyth, Competitors Co-operating: Establishing a Supply Chain to Manage Genetically Modified Canola, proceedings of the Economics of Quality Conference, Saskatoon, (December, 1999).
19. Preeg, E. H., Reactions to Seattle: The South Rises in Seattle, Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 3, Issue 1, (2000), pp. 183-186.
20. Quintillan, Sara Pardo, Free Trade, Public Health Protection and Consumer Information in the European and WTO Context: Hormone-treated Beef and Genetically Modified Organisms, 33 J.W.T. 6 (1999), pp. 147-197.
21. Runge, C.F. and L.A. Jackson., Negative Labelling of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs): The Experience of rBST, AgBioForum, 3(1), 310.314, available on the World Wide Web: www.agbioforum.org, (2000).
22. Spriggs, J. and G. Isaac, Food Safety and International Competitiveness: The Case of Beef, (CABI Publishing, Oxon, UK, Forthcoming).
23. Woolcock, S., European and North American Approaches to Regulation: Continued Divergence? in van Scherpenberg, J. and E. Thiel. (eds), Towards Rival Regionalism? US and EU Regional Regulatory Regime Building (Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1998), pp. 257-276.
24. WTO 1998, WTO Documents WT/DS26/AB/R and WT/DS48/AB/R, EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Downloadable from (16 January 1998).