The pros and cons of animal health harmonisation

Abstract

It has been argued that the global harmonisation of animal health procedures, regulations and responses will improve animal health and provide economic benefits. Harmonisation of regulations can be driven by trade reform, such as multilateral or bilateral agreements, or as a response to private quality assurance programmes. At an international level, trade reform is currently focused on reducing the costs of trading between countries. To achieve this, bilateral agreements, where possible, are harmonising regulations throughout all sectors of the economy. However, as with any new developments, there are both positive and negative outcomes that should be explored to understand the net effect of these changes on animal health, the economy and society. In this article, the authors debate the economic foundations of harmonisation, explore alternative methods to achieve it, and discuss its pros and cons to more fully understand the opportunity costs from countries adopting the same level of risk to animal health.

World Trade Organization agreements: a framework for trade in animals and animal products

“…It is thus important to know under which Agreement a measure falls. However, the two Agreements have some common elements, including basic obligations on non-discrimination, and on harmonisation with international standards (see Hamilton and Adamson et al in this issue [3,4]) and transparency (see Cáceres et al and Alcala & Martinez-Hommel, this issue [5,6]).…”

International regulatory cooperation: contribution of the OIE and the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and SPS Committee

“…The SPS Agreement seeks to strike a balance between the right of Members to protect animal, plant and human life and health, on the one hand, and to avoid unnecessary barriers to trade, on the other. It enshrines general WTO principles (6), such as transparency (7) and non-discrimination, as well as science-based principles that apply specifically to sanitary and phytosanitary measures, such as regionalisation (8) and equivalence (9), or the way in which these measures are regulated internationally, such as harmonisation (10). This paper explores the principle of harmonisation, and examines the ways in which the WTO and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) jointly contribute to promoting international regulatory cooperation (IRC) among their Members.…”