Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Externalities and Agricultural Import Bans: Evaluating Regionalization Measures in Light of the Russia–Pigs Dispute

  • EMILY BLANCHARD (a1) and MARK WU (a2)

Abstract

Article 6 of the SPS Agreement presents a series of interlinked obligations for importing and exporting countries of diseased agricultural products. The Russia–Pigs dispute raises the question of when an importing country is justified in imposing a ban on products from exporting countries unaffected by the disease, on the basis of the fact that the country is part of the same customs union as another country inflicted with the disease. This Article contends that four distinct classes of cross-border and cross-product externalities ought to play an important role when assessing this question in the future. It discusses the possible roles to be played by bilateral, sequential, pass-through, and supply chain externalities in propagating the transmission of agricultural disease across borders through trade.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Footnotes

Hide All

For helpful comments and discussion, we thank Maria Alcover, Chad Bown, Colette van der Ven, and the other participants at the 2017 WTO Case Law Conference held at the European University Institute, June 2018.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Bown, C. and Hillman, J. (2017), ‘Bird Flu, the OIE, and National Regulation: The WTO's India–Agricultural Products Dispute’, World Trade Review, 15(2): 235257
Dietze, K., Beltran-Alcrudo, D., Khomenko, S., Seck, B., Pinto, J., Diallo, A., Lamien, C., Lubroth, J., Martin, V., and Rozstalnyy, A. (2012), ‘African Swine Fever (ASF) Recent Developments and Timely Updates – Worrisome Dynamics: Steady Spread Towards Unaffected Areas Could Have Disastrous Impact’, Focus on, 6: 16.
EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (2010), ‘Scientific Opinion on African Swine Fever’, EFSA Journal, 8(3): 1556.
Jazdzewski, K. and Popiolek, M. (2014), ‘African Swine Fever in Poland: Situation and Implemented Actions’, Presentation to SCFCAH meeting, 4–5 March, Brussels.
Khomenko, S., Titov, I., Tsybanov, S., Gogin, A., and Malogolovkin, A. (2013), ‘African Swine Fever in the Russian Federation: Risk Factors for Europe and Beyond’, EMPRES Watch, 28: 114.
Kolbasov, D., Titov, I., Tsybanov, S., Gogin, A., and Malogolovkin, A. (2018), ‘African Swine Fever Virus, Siberia, Russia, 2017’, Emerging Infectious Diseases, 24(4): 796798.
Margolis, M. and Shogren, J. (2012), ‘Disguised Protectionism, Global Trade Rules and Alien Invasive Species’, Environmental and Resource Economics, 51(1):105118.
Marinas, R. (2017), ‘Romania Reports African Swine Fever in Farm Pigs’, Reuters, 2 July.
Mueller, R. (2017), ‘African Swine Fever Detected in Wild Boars in Czech Republic’, Reuters, 27 June.
Nurmoja, I., Schulz, K., Staubach, C., Sauter-Louis, C., Depner, K., Conraths, F. J., and Viltrop, A. (2017), ‘Development of African Swine Fever Epidemic among Wild Boar in Estonia – Two Different Areas in the Epidemiological Focus’, Scientific Reports, 7: 12562.
OECD (2018), ‘Meat Consumption (Indicator), doi: 10.1787/fa290fd0-en (accessed on 17 July 2018).
OIE (2013), African Swine Fever, Paris: OIE.
Ojsevkis, E., Guberti, V., Seržants, M., Westergaard, J., Gallardo, C., Rodze, I., and Depner, K. (2016), ‘African Swine Fever Virus Introduction Into the EU in 2014: Experience of Latvia’, Research in Veterinary Science, 105: 2830.
Saggi, K. and Wu, M. (2017), ‘Trade and Agricultural Disease: Import Restrictions in the Wake of the India–Agricultural Products Dispute’, World Trade Review, 16(2): 279302.
Stokstad, E. (2017), ‘African Swine Fever Outbreak Alarms Wildlife Biologists and Veterinarians’, Science, 20 December.
ter Beek, V. (2012), ‘Russia: ASF Spread to Ukraine Due to Inadequate Transport Rules’, Pig Progress, 2 August.
United Nations Commodity Trade Statistic Database, https://comtrade.un.org.
Vorotnikov, V. (2013), ‘Russia Bans Pork Imports From Belarus’, Pig Progress, 2 September.

Externalities and Agricultural Import Bans: Evaluating Regionalization Measures in Light of the Russia–Pigs Dispute

  • EMILY BLANCHARD (a1) and MARK WU (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed