Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAshford, Nicholas
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-14T16:49:29Z
dc.date.available2021-07-14T16:49:29Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131089
dc.descriptionLetter to the Editoren_US
dc.description.abstractIn an otherwise insightful and thoughtful article, Sebastian Pfotenhauer (Trade Policy Is Science Policy,” Issues, Fall 2013) might better have entitled his contribution “Trade Policy Needs to Be Reconciled with Science Policy.” The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the agreements administered by the World Trade Organization, particularly the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), were adopted to promote international trade and increase the economic benefits therefrom. Harmonization of environmental, health, and safety, and (EHS) standards and practices was generally not the goal of these agreements, except perhaps for the TBT agreement, which was predicated on EHS standards being based on “strong science” that could result in uniformity dictated by rigorous scientific consensus focused on risk assessments.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.titleTrade Policyen_US
dc.typeOtheren_US
dc.identifier.citationScience and Technologyen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record