Monday, August 12, 2019
Genetically Modified Organisms, U.S. and E.U. Trade Dispute Research Paper
Genetically Modified Organisms, U.S. and E.U. Trade Dispute - Research Paper Example , the EU argued that it has acted in good faith, stating that it has acted through the precautionary principle, in order to protect the interests of those who produced the non-GMO products for its markets. Despite this argument, the WTO ruled against the EU stating that it would have been necessary for the latter to provide credible scientific evidence concerning the potential harm of GMO before taking action against the authorization of American GMO into its markets (Viju, Yeung and Kerr 1207). As a response, the European Union has made amendments to its regulatory framework to ensure that its member states are given the power to ban any GMO products within their territories. However, there has been general agreement within the member states that the bans might not be effective in the current situation, with some arguing that the new proposed regulations might not be in line with the rules of the WTO. The complex nature of the EUÃ¢â¬â¢s decision making process has been blamed for the resulting trade dispute between the United States and the European Union. The fact that this dispute took place was due to the fact that the European Union is still extremely cautious concerning the importation of GMO into its territory. Most of the concern from the EU is based on the belief that some of the GMO that are imported, especially from the United States, may not be fit for human consumption and if consumed may end up having long term detrimental effects on the health of those who consume it. This is the reason why the EU chose to take on the precautionary principle, where it prevented any GMO products from the United States from entering any of the markets within its territory (Karlsson 51). During the case brought before the WTO, the argument that the EU was taking illegal action... This essay stresses that some political analysts have suggested that the best way to resolve this dispute would be for the United States to take the lead through the easing of restrictions against European beef products so that the EU can also see it fit to reciprocate in kind. In addition, there has been the suggestion that the creation of a free trade zone between the United States and the EU would create an avenue where there would be a reduction of trade disputes and an increase in cooperation between them. The fact that he enjoys the good will of the European public is likely to work in his favor not only in matters concerning the ending of the beef import stand off, but also those of the creation of the free trade zone. A free trade zone would be the ideal guarantee for the ending of most, if not all the disputes that involve these two entities. This report makes a conclusion that the existence of restrictions against American beef products in the European Union have also been created because of the need to ensure that these products are not in any way detrimental to the environment. The environmental impact of GMO products are yet to be fully analyzed and it is high time that research concerning it be conducted to ensure that better ways of managing these products are developed. The United States, on the other hand, has to adopt some of the concern about GMO effect on health and environment because very little research has been conducted on the subject. Through this adoption, there will be a better understanding of the reasons behind the European ban on some of its GMO products, and this will enable them to reach an amicable solution to their disputes.