Beyond the Science/Democracy Dichotomy: The World Trade Organisation Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement and Administrative Constitutionalism

Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade Governance and Social Regulation

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 327-350

  Fisher, Elizabeth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85193385538     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (65)

1. J Jowell, ‘Of Vires Or Vacuums: The Constitutional Context of Judicial Review’ in C Forsyth (ed), Judicial Review and the Constitution (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2000).
2. D Wirth ‘The Role of Science in the Uruguay Round and NAFTA Trade Disciplines’ (1994) 27 Cornell International Law Journal 817.
3. W Maruyama, ‘A New Pillar of the WTO: Sound Science’, (1998) 32 International Lawyer 651
4. D Roberts, ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Risk Management in the Post-Uruguay Round Era: An Economic Perspective’ in National Research Council (ed), Incorporating Science, Economics, and Sociology in Developing Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards in International Trade: Proceedings of a Conference (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000), 33 at 35
5. T Weiler, ‘International Regulatory Reform Obligations’ (2000) 34 Journal of World Trade 71.
6. J Trachtman, ‘International Trade as a Vector in Domestic Regulatory Reform: Discrimination, Cost-Benefit Analysis, and Negotiations’ (2000) 24 Fordham International Law Journal 726
7. A Sykes, ‘The (Limited) Role of Regulatory Harmonisation in International Goods and Services Markets’ (1999) 2 Journal of International Economic Law 49.
8. M Trebilcock and R Howse, ‘Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Diversity: Reconciling Competitive Markets with Competitive Politics’ (1998) 6 European Journal of Law & Economics 5 at 6.
9. C Button, The Power to Protect: Trade, Health and Uncertainty in the WTO (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004), at 44.
10. K Ambrose, ‘Science and the WTO’ (2000) 31 Law and Policy in International Business 861.
11. O Perez, Ecological Sensitivity and Global Legal Pluralism (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004), at 117.
12. A Guzman, ‘Food Fears: Health and Safety at the WTO’ (2004) 45 Virginia Law Review 1
13. J Bohanes, ‘Risk Regulation in WTO Law: A Procedure-Based Approach to the Precautionary Principle’ (2002) 40 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 323.
14. A Sykes, ‘Regulatory Protectionism and the Law of International Trade’ (1999) 66 University of Chicago Law Review 1
15. G Sampson, ‘Risk and the WTO’ in D Robertson and A Kellow (eds), Globalisation and the Environment: Risk Assessment and the WTO (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2001).
16. V Walker, ‘The Myth of Science as a ‘‘Neutral Arbiter’’ for Triggering Precautions’ (2003) 26 Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 197.
17. R Howse, ‘Democracy, Science, and Free Trade: Risk Regulation on Trial at the WTO’ (2000) 98 Michigan Law Review 2329
18. D Winickoff et al., ‘Adjudicating the GM Food Wars: Science, Risk and Democracy in World Trade Law’, (2005) 30 Yale Journal of International Law 81.
19. S Harlow, ‘Science-based Trade Disputes: A New Challenge in Harmonising the Evidentiary Systems of Law and Science’ (2004) 24 Risk Analysis 443
20. T Christoforou, ‘Settlement of Science-based Trade Disputes in the WTO: A Critical Review of the Developing Case Law in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty’ (2000) 8 New York University Environmental Law Journal 622
21. T Cottier and P Mavroidis (eds), The Role of the Judge in International Trade Regulation: Experience and Lessons for the WTO (Ann Arbor, Mich: University of Michigan Press, 2003)
22. J Peel, ‘Risk Regulation under the WTO SPS Agreement: Science as an International Normative Yardstick’, Jean Monnet Working Papers 02/04.
23. D Palmeter and P Mavroidis, Dispute Settlement in the World Trade Organisation, (2nd edn, Cambridge: CUP, 2004), at 152–5
24. M Oesch, Standards of Review in WTO Dispute Resolution (Oxford: OUP, 2003).
25. S Lash and B Szerszynski (eds), Risk, Environment And Modernity: Towards A New Ecology (London: Sage Publications, 1996, at 27).
26. D. Moss, When All Else Fails: Government as the Ultimate Risk Manager, (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UP, 2002).
27. H Schepel, The Constitution of Private Governance (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2005).
28. E Fisher, Risk Regulation and Administrative Constitutionalism (Oxford: Hart Publishing, forthcoming) at Chap 1.
29. C Sunstein and E Ullmann-Margalit, ‘Second-Order Decisions’ (1999) 110 Ethics 5 at 17.
30. B Wynne, ‘Uncertainty And Environmental Learning’ (1992) 2 Global Environmental Change 111.
31. A Irwin, Citizen Science (London: Routledge, 1995)
32. S Krimsky, ‘Epistemic Considerations on the Value of Folk-Wisdom in Science and Technology’ (1984) 3 Policy Studies Review 246.
33. S Funtowicz and J Ravetz, ‘Three Types of Risk Assessment and the Emergence of Post Normal Science’ in S Krimsky and D Golding (eds), Social Theories of Risk (Westport, Conn: Praeger, 1992), at 251
34. J Rossi, ‘Participation Run Amok: The Costs of Mass Participation for Deliberative Agency Decision-Making’ (1997) 92 NorthWestern University Law Review 173.
35. D Robertson, The Penguin Dictionary of Politics, (2nd edn, London: Penguin, 1993), at 129.
36. R Dahl, ‘Democracy’ in N Smelser and P Baltes (eds), International Encyclopaedia of the Social and Behavioural Sciences (Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd., 2001), at 3405
37. J Steele, ‘Participation and Deliberation in Environmental Law: A Problem Solving Approach’ (2001) 21 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 415.
38. B Latour, Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy (Cambridge Mass: Harvard UP, 2004).
39. E Fisher, ‘The Rise of the Risk Commonwealth and the Challenge for Administrative Law’ w2003x Public Law 455
40. E Fisher, ‘Risk and Environmental Law: A Beginner’s Guide’ in B Richardson and S Wood (eds), Environmental Law for Sustainability: A Critical Reader (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2006).
41. J Mashaw Greed, Chaos and Governance: Using Public Choice to Improve Public Law (New Haven, Conn: Yale UP, 1997)
42. P Craig, Public Law and Democracy in the United Kingdom and the United States of America (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990).
43. C McIlwain, Constitutionalism: Ancient and Modern (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1947), at 3.
44. R Stewart, ‘The Reformation of American Administrative Law’ (1975) 88 Harvard Law Review 1661.
45. C Sunstein, Free Markets and Social Justice (New York: Oxford UP, 1997), at Chap 14.
46. M Weber, From Max Weber: Essays In Sociology, (London: Routledge, 1991) at Chap 7.
47. A Stirling, ‘Risk, Uncertainty and Precaution: Some Instrumental Implications from the Social Sciences’ in F Berkhout et al. (eds), Negotiating Environmental Change: New Perspectives From Social Science (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2003).
48. A Klinke and O Renn, ‘A New Approach to Risk Evaluation and Management: Risk-Based, Precaution Based, and Discourse Based Strategies’ (2002) 22 Risk Analysis 1071.
49. M. Shapiro, Who Guards the Guardians: Judicial Control of Administration (Athens, Geo: University of Georgia Press, 1988).
50. E Fisher and R Harding, ‘The Precautionary Principle and Administrative Constitutionalism: The Development of Frameworks for Applying the Precautionary Principle’ in E Fisher et al. (eds), Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Perspectives and Prospects (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006)
51. E Fisher ‘Precaution, Law and Principles of Good Administration’ (2005) 52(6) Water Science and Technology 19
52. B Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UP, 1993).
53. E Fisher, ‘The European Union in the Age of Accountability’ (2004) 24 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies at 495.
54. S Rayner and R Cantor, ‘How Fair is Safe Enough? The Cultural Approach to Societal Technology Choice’ (1987) 7 Risk Analysis 39.
55. L Rhomberg, A Survey of Methods for Chemical Risk Assessment Among Federal Regulatory Agencies (Washington, DC: National Commission for Risk Assessment and Management 1997)
56. Interdepartmental Liaison Group on Risk Assessment, Use of Risk Assessment Within Government Departments (London: Health and Safety Executive, 1996).
57. E Fisher, ‘Drowning by Numbers: Standard Setting in Risk Regulation and the Pursuit of Accountable Public Administration’ (2000) 20 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 109.
58. E Fisher, ‘The Risks of Quantifying Justice: The Use of the Substantial Evidence Test in Judicial Review of OSHA Rule-Making’ in R Baldwin (ed), Law and Uncertainty, Risks and Legal Processes (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1997), at 293.
59. S Jasanoff, The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policy Makers (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UP, 1990).
60. J Weiler, ‘The Rule of Lawyers and the Ethos of Diplomats: Reflections on the Internal and External Legitimacy of WTO Dispute Settlement’ (2002) 13 American Review of International Arbitration 177.
61. R Steinberg, ‘Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints’ (2004) 98 American Journal of International Law 247.
62. C Sunstein, Designing Democracy: What Constitutions Do (New York: OUP, 2001)
63. M Maduro, We, The Court: The European Court of Justice and the European Economic Constitution (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 1998).
64. H Arthurs, ‘Without the Law’: Administrative Justice and Legal Pluralism in Nineteenth Century England (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985).
65. N de Sadeleer, Environmental Principles: From Political Slogans to Legal Rules (Oxford: OUP, 2002).