Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T18:28:26.483Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Safety standards and indigenous products: what role for traditional knowledge?

from PART III - Responding to international economic law commitments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2011

Susy Frankel
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington
Meredith Kolsky Lewis
Affiliation:
Victoria University of Wellington
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Indigenous communities have used native plants as foods and for medicinal purposes for thousands of years. Some of these indigenous products have proven sufficiently popular that individuals outside the indigenous community have sought to consume, purchase and market them. In certain instances, new products have been derived from the indigenous plant and sold outside the indigenous community. In other cases, the indigenous product has been exported in its original form, but utilized in non-traditional ways in the export market. In recent years, various WTO Members have imposed bans and other restrictions on the importation of certain indigenous products on the basis of health and safety concerns. These restrictions tend to be blanket bans on the products as a whole, thus curtailing both the ability to consume indigenous products according to their traditional uses, as well as the adapted versions of such products.

This chapter uses the example of the recent bans on kava from Pacific Island countries as context to argue that the safety of indigenous products with long histories of traditional use should be evaluated on their own merits. They should not be deemed the equivalent of new products with new uses that have been adapted from the indigenous plant, nor should their safety be assessed in combination with such new products. Bans on indigenous products may well be overbroad if they do not differentiate between traditional (quite possibly safe) uses and new (perhaps not-so-safe) uses.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blumenthal, M., ‘German Government Reconsiders Kava’, HerbalGram, 67 (2005) 21Google Scholar
Bowman, C., ‘Pacific Island Nations: Towards Shared Representation’ in P. Gallagher, P. Low and A. L. Stoler (eds.), Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation (Cambridge University Press, 2005)Google Scholar
Bossche, P., The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization (Cambridge University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marceau, G. and Trachtman, J., ‘The Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade’, Journal of World Trade, 36 (2002) 811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, J., The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (Oxford University Press, 2007)Google Scholar
Davey, W. J., ‘Reflections on the Appellate Body Decision in the Hormones Case and the Meaning of the SPS Agreement’ in Bermann, G. A. and Mavroidis, P. C. (eds.), Trade and Human Health and Safety (Cambridge University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Bown, C. P. and Hoekman, B. M., ‘WTO Dispute Settlement and the Missing Developing Country Cases: Engaging the Private Sector’, Journal of International Economic Law, 8 (2005) 861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charnovitz, S., ‘Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions’, American Journal of International Law, 95 (2001) 792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. S. and Otsuki, T., ‘Food Safety and Trade: Winners and Losers in a Non-Harmonized World’, Journal of Economic Integration, 18(2) (2003) 266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raustiala, K., ‘The Architecture of International Cooperation: Transgovernmental Networks & the Future of International Law’, Virginia Journal of International Law, 43 (2002) 1Google Scholar
A.-M. Slaughter, ‘Sovereignty and Power in a Networked World Order’, Stanford Journal of International Law, 40 (2004) 283Google Scholar
Trachtman, Joel, ‘The Constitutions of the WTO’, European Journal of International Law, 17 (2006) 623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottier, T. and Panizzon, M., ‘Legal Perspectives on Traditional Knowledge: the Case for Intellectual Property Protection’, Journal of International Economic Law, 7 (2004) 371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Echols, M. A., ‘Food Safety Regulation in the European Union and the United States: Different Cultures, Different Laws’, Columbia Journal of European Law, 4 (1998) 525Google Scholar
Frankel, S., ‘Trademarks, Traditional Knowledge and Cultural Intellectual Property’ in Dinwoodie, G. B. and Janis, M. D., (eds.), Trademark Law and Theory (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2008)Google Scholar
Silverglade, B. A., ‘The WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Weakening Food Safety Regulations to Facilitate Trade?’, Food and Drug Law Journal, 55 (2000) 517Google ScholarPubMed
Trebilcock, M. and Soloway, J., ‘International Trade Policy and Domestic Food Safety Regulation: The Case for Substantial Deference by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body under the SPS Agreement’ in D. L. M. Kennedy and Southwick, J. D. (eds.), The Political Economy of International Trade Law (Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
Chang, H. F., ‘Risk Regulation, Endogenous Public Concerns, and the Hormones Dispute: Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself?’, Southern California Law Review, 77 (2004) 743Google Scholar
Scott, Joanne has criticized the silencing of culture in the SPS Agreement, which she terms a technocratic zone. See ‘On Kith, Kine (and Crustaceans): Trade and Environment in the EU and WTO’ in Weiler, J. H. H. (ed.), The EU, the WTO, and the NAFTA: Towards a Common Law of International Trade? (Oxford University Press, 2000)Google Scholar
Button, C., The Power to Protect: Trade, Health and Uncertainty in the WTO (Oregon, Hart Publishing, 2004)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×