英语论文网

ion much like tariffs and are an example of an illegitimate NTM. Food safety standards are an example of a potentially legitimate NTM. The standards are set to safeguard public health and if that is their true function they are legitimate. They may, however, be misused, for instance, by requiring costly test procedures for imports. In that case, they are illegitimate and should be either removed or redesigned or be implemented in a non-discriminatory way.

2.2 Non-tariff measures in WTO trade policies reviews

Regulations and other non-tariff barriers are rapidly overtaking tariffs as the main obstacle to trade. The WTO has a unique instrument that could be used to shed much needed light on these measures.

The WTO secretariat’s trade policy reviews (TPRs) contain long sections on the tariffs, subsidies and anti-dumping duties in place in the country under scrutiny. Dealing with these instruments is a gratifying since it is relatively easy to calculate average tariffs, add up subsidies and count anti-dumping measures. Any protectionist intent or harmful effects for the economy are immediately understood by most readers.

The WTO’s TPRs give short shrift to regulatory trade barriers. Their treatment is generally short, superficial and unsystematic. This take-it-easy approach is becoming increasingly problematic. Tariffs and subsidies are on a long-term downward trajectory (despite the current crisis), whereas non-trade regulation with serious effects on trade is abounding.

It is time for the TPRs address this challenge. A starting point would be a well-organised and comprehensive overview of the regulations in place and future legislative intentions. In order to permit comparison across time and countries, this should be complemented with such quantitative and standardised descriptions of regulatory barriers as can be assembled at reasonable cost. If reliable analysis of trade and welfare effects of regulatory barriers is available, it should also be included in the TPRs.

The most important aspect, however, should be a thorough and critical examination of policy-making processes. TPRs should report on a list of key policy-making characteristics and compare them to best practice standards.

The reviews should, for instance, offer a clear description of how countries arrive at sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. This could be done by focusing on the procedural provisions that WTO Members take to implement their obligations under the SPS Agreement.

In sum, TPRs could be an important tool for tackling excessive trade barriers arising from non-tariff measures without having to go through dispute settlement. It could harness the power of transparency - triggering international and domestic pressure to remove unjustifiable barriers and to improve decision-making procedures so that inappropriate measures are not taken in the first place. But this would require giving more authority and resources to the WTO secretariat. Ideally, TPRs on non-tariff measures would be published as a separate report.

If the WTO addresses the transparency challenge, it can facilitate unilateral liberalisation and prepare a better starting ground for future multilateral negotiations. While enhanced treatment of non-tariff measures needs special attention, a broader change is required. TPRs should be transformed from a diplomatic exerc本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。