The role of international organizations in preventing conflicts between the SPS Agreement and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

• Date: 01 July 2020
• Author: Jingjing Zhao
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12326
• Published date: 01 July 2020

RECIEL. 2020;29:271–281. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/reel  

|

  271© 2020 John Wile y & Sons Ltd

1 | INTRODUCTION

International t rade law and environmental law i ntersect frequently,

as trade can so metimes have an impact on the envir onment. Given

the largely dive rgent goals of intern ational trade l aw and environ-

mental law – with t he former most ly focused on tr ade facilitat ion

and the latter o n environmental protection – t he potential for con-

flict betwe en the two regimes is high, a to pic that has been the sub-

ject of significant research.1

The World Trade Organi zation (WTO) A greement on Sa nitary

and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement)2 and the Cartage na

Protocol on Biosaf ety to the Convent ion on Biologica l Diversity

(CBD)3 are the mos t relevant treaties when it com es to the regula-

tion of internatio nal trade in gene tically modi fied organism s

(GMOs). This art icle takes the rel ationship bet ween the SPS

Agreement an d the Cartagena Proto col as a typical example of t he

much-debated interaction between international trade and envi-

ronmental law.4

Existing lite rature mainly discuss es the avoidance of conflic ts be-

tween trade a nd environmental treaties f rom the perspective of in-

ternational ad judicative for ums (and the releva nt understa nding of

institutional dimensions of fragmentation which is focused on judicial

institutions), while largely disregarding the equally important per-

spectives of international institutions/organizations and States.5

 1See, e.g., F Ma cmillan, WTO and the Environment (Sweet & Maxw ell 2001); and E Vra nes,

Trade and the Enviro nment: Fundam ental Issues in I nternational L aw, WTO Law, and Lega l

Theory (Oxford University Press 2009) 29.

 2WTO Agreem ent on the Appli cation of Sanit ary and Phyt osanitary M easures (adop ted

15 April 1994, ente red into force 1 Jan uary 1995) 1867 UNTS 493.

 3Cartage na Protocol on Bio safety to the Co nvention on Biol ogical Divers ity (adopted 29

January 20 00, entered i nto force 11 Septemb er 2003) 39 ILM 1027 (C artagena

Protocol).

 4R Wolfrum, PT St oll and A Seiber t-Fohr (eds), Max Plan ck Commentari es on World Trade

Law: WTO-Technica l Barriers and S PS Measures (B rill 2007) 437–467; L Gr uszczynski ,

Regulating He alth and Enviro nmental Risks u nder WTO Law: A Cr itical Analy sis of the SPS

Agreement (Oxford Uni versity Press 2 010); J Pauwelyn , Conflict of Nor ms in Public

Internation al Law: How WTO La w Relates to Other Ru les of Internati onal Law (Cambridge

Universit y Press 2003) 24 8; and S Safrin, ‘ The Relationsh ip with Other A greements:

Much Ado abou t a Savings Claus e’ in C Bail, R Falkne r and H Marquard (ed s), The

Cartagena Pr otocol on Biosafe ty: Reconcil ing Trade in Biotechn ology with Envi ronment and

Development? (Routledge 2 002) 438, 441–442 .

 5See, e.g., In ternational L aw Commission ‘ Fragmentati on of Internation al Law:

Difficul ties Arising fr om the Diversif ication and E xpansion of Inte rnational Law ’ UN Doc

A/CN.4/L.6 82 (13 April 2006) 247, para 48 9; and P Merkouris , Article 31(3)(c ) VCLT and

the Principle of Systemic Integration: Normative Shadows in Plato’s Cave (Brill/Nijhoff

2015) 4.

Received: 8 Sept ember 2019 

|

  Revised: 20 Janua ry 2020 

|

  Accepted: 6 March 20 20

DOI: 10 .1111/reel .12326

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The role of international organizations in preventing conflicts

between the SPS Agreement and the Cartagena Protocol on

Biosafety

Jingjing Zhao

Correspondence

Jingjing Zhao.

Email: jingjing.zhao@nankai.edu.cn;

jingjingzhao2017@126.com

This article ana lyses how conflict s between the World Trade Org anization (W TO)

Agreement on Sa nitary and Phy tosanitar y Measures and the C artagena Protocol o n

Biosafety – a ty pical example of the relationship bet ween trade and environmenta l trea-

ties – are dealt with at t he institutional le vel. It systematica lly explores the rol e that the

WTO and Protocol orga ns (may) play in preventing treaty conflict s. Through a theoretical

analysis, the ar ticle studies how re levant international or ganizations could cont ribute to

the avoidance of treaty co nflicts through actions t aken at the institutional level. The d oc-

trinal assert ions made in this article are supp orted by complementary e mpirical research.

The article high lights the extent to which institution al cooperation and coordination be-

tween the WTO and P rotocol organs are ac tually happening , and offers sugge stions on

how conflicts bet ween the treaties can effe ctively be avoided at the institut ional level.