title: International jurisprudence on trade and environmental health: one step forward, two steps back?
abstract: Since the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), there has been considerable debate regarding the impact of its rules on public health. By contrast, the role of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has received little attention, even though the bodies responsible for settling disputes are the ultimate interpreters of WTO rules and agreements. To date, three WTO disputes that relate to occupational and/or environmental health have been fully litigated. A review of the decisions and reasoning in these cases indicates that WTO jurisprudence is evolving, as Panels and the Appellate Body try--with varying degrees of success--to balance countries' rights and obligations under international trade agreements with their right to protect occupational and environmental health. Disputes between nations can have an impact beyond the parties concerned, and raise questions about the relationship between trade agreements and other international agreements, especially multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs).
authors.affiliation: World Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia, Indraprastha Estate, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110 002, India. timmermansk@searo.who.int
authors.forename: Karin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Timmermans
mesh_terms: D001194:Asbestos / Q000633:toxicity; D001709:Biotechnology; D003132:Commerce / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D034462:Dissent and Disputes / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D004781:Environmental Exposure / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D004782:Environmental Health / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D004787:Environmental Pollution / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D014943:Global Health; D006801:Humans; D007391:International Cooperation / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012408:Rubber / Q000633:toxicity
chemical_list: D001194:Asbestos; D012408:Rubber