世界贸易组织关心生态系统健康吗?农产品贸易案例

Donald E. Buckingham
{"title":"世界贸易组织关心生态系统健康吗?农产品贸易案例","authors":"Donald E. Buckingham","doi":"10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>ABSTRACT</p><p>We now live under a comprehensive international trading system which affects what we eat, wear, buy, and produce. As of January 1995, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947 (GATT 1947) was replaced by the World Trade Organization Agreement (WTOA) which sets out rules affecting practically all trade in goods and services worldwide.</p><p>The implications for trade in agricultural goods are enormous. Today, not only are rules concerning trade in goods generally applicable to trade in agricultural goods, but new rules specific to trade in such products are set out in the WTOA’s Agreement on Agriculture. The WTOA promises to limit national agricultural policies which impede international trade in agricultural products. The new WTOA rules should increase efficiency of and decrease friction arising in trade in agricultural products. These developments represent truly positive economic and political outcomes.</p><p>But what will be the environmental effects of changes in trade flows facilitated by WTOA rules and institutions? How will the new rules affect ecosystem health? The truth is that the worlds of trade law and ecosystem health are light-years apart. Advocates for free trade and those for the environment often distrust each other and think that the interests of one can be advanced only through the sacrifice by the other. The first part of this article traces some of the reasons for the evolution of this seemingly zero-sum game. The second section of the article examines the historical development and current treatment of environmental measures under the WTOA.</p><p>The agricultural sector is then highlighted as a microcosm of how the new WTOA rules will produce environmental effects which positively, although perhaps unintentionally, affect agroecosystems. The article concludes with speculation as to whether it is not now time to reorient the acrimonious trade/environment debate to one which is less adversarial and more focused on achieving ecosystem health while continuing to improve international market access and trade relations.</p>","PeriodicalId":100392,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the World Trade Organization Care about Ecosystem Health? The Case of Trade in Agricultural Products\",\"authors\":\"Donald E. Buckingham\",\"doi\":\"10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>ABSTRACT</p><p>We now live under a comprehensive international trading system which affects what we eat, wear, buy, and produce. As of January 1995, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947 (GATT 1947) was replaced by the World Trade Organization Agreement (WTOA) which sets out rules affecting practically all trade in goods and services worldwide.</p><p>The implications for trade in agricultural goods are enormous. Today, not only are rules concerning trade in goods generally applicable to trade in agricultural goods, but new rules specific to trade in such products are set out in the WTOA’s Agreement on Agriculture. The WTOA promises to limit national agricultural policies which impede international trade in agricultural products. The new WTOA rules should increase efficiency of and decrease friction arising in trade in agricultural products. These developments represent truly positive economic and political outcomes.</p><p>But what will be the environmental effects of changes in trade flows facilitated by WTOA rules and institutions? How will the new rules affect ecosystem health? The truth is that the worlds of trade law and ecosystem health are light-years apart. Advocates for free trade and those for the environment often distrust each other and think that the interests of one can be advanced only through the sacrifice by the other. The first part of this article traces some of the reasons for the evolution of this seemingly zero-sum game. The second section of the article examines the historical development and current treatment of environmental measures under the WTOA.</p><p>The agricultural sector is then highlighted as a microcosm of how the new WTOA rules will produce environmental effects which positively, although perhaps unintentionally, affect agroecosystems. The article concludes with speculation as to whether it is not now time to reorient the acrimonious trade/environment debate to one which is less adversarial and more focused on achieving ecosystem health while continuing to improve international market access and trade relations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosystem Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosystem Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1526-0992.1998.00077.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

摘要我们现在生活在一个全面的国际贸易体系下,它影响着我们吃、穿、买和生产。1995年1月,《1947年关税与贸易总协定》(GATT 1947)被《世界贸易组织协定》(WTOA)所取代,后者制定了影响全球几乎所有货物和服务贸易的规则。这对农产品贸易的影响是巨大的。今天,不仅有关货物贸易的规则普遍适用于农产品贸易,而且世贸组织的《农业协定》还规定了专门针对此类产品贸易的新规则。世贸组织承诺限制阻碍农产品国际贸易的国家农业政策。世贸组织新规则应提高农产品贸易效率,减少农产品贸易摩擦。这些发展代表了真正积极的经济和政治成果。但是,在世贸组织规则和制度的推动下,贸易流动的变化会对环境产生什么影响?新规定将如何影响生态系统的健康?事实是,贸易法和生态系统健康的世界相隔数光年。主张自由贸易和保护环境的人往往互不信任,认为只有牺牲对方的利益才能促进一方的利益。本文的第一部分追溯了这个看似零和游戏演变的一些原因。文章的第二部分考察了世界贸易协定下环境措施的历史发展和现状。然后强调农业部门是世界贸易协定新规则如何产生环境影响的一个缩影,这些影响对农业生态系统产生积极的(尽管可能是无意的)影响。文章最后猜测,现在是不是时候将激烈的贸易/环境辩论重新定位为一个不那么敌对,更侧重于实现生态系统健康,同时继续改善国际市场准入和贸易关系的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Does the World Trade Organization Care about Ecosystem Health? The Case of Trade in Agricultural Products

ABSTRACT

We now live under a comprehensive international trading system which affects what we eat, wear, buy, and produce. As of January 1995, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947 (GATT 1947) was replaced by the World Trade Organization Agreement (WTOA) which sets out rules affecting practically all trade in goods and services worldwide.

The implications for trade in agricultural goods are enormous. Today, not only are rules concerning trade in goods generally applicable to trade in agricultural goods, but new rules specific to trade in such products are set out in the WTOA’s Agreement on Agriculture. The WTOA promises to limit national agricultural policies which impede international trade in agricultural products. The new WTOA rules should increase efficiency of and decrease friction arising in trade in agricultural products. These developments represent truly positive economic and political outcomes.

But what will be the environmental effects of changes in trade flows facilitated by WTOA rules and institutions? How will the new rules affect ecosystem health? The truth is that the worlds of trade law and ecosystem health are light-years apart. Advocates for free trade and those for the environment often distrust each other and think that the interests of one can be advanced only through the sacrifice by the other. The first part of this article traces some of the reasons for the evolution of this seemingly zero-sum game. The second section of the article examines the historical development and current treatment of environmental measures under the WTOA.

The agricultural sector is then highlighted as a microcosm of how the new WTOA rules will produce environmental effects which positively, although perhaps unintentionally, affect agroecosystems. The article concludes with speculation as to whether it is not now time to reorient the acrimonious trade/environment debate to one which is less adversarial and more focused on achieving ecosystem health while continuing to improve international market access and trade relations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
BOOK REVIEW BOOK REVIEW BOOK REVIEW BOOK REVIEW Logical Interrelations between Four Sustainability Parameters: Stability, Continuation, Longevity, and Health
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1