Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T12:22:38.759Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Caroline E. Foster, Global Regulatory Standards in Environmental and Health Disputes: Regulatory Coherence, Due Regard, and Due Diligence Oxford University Press, 2021, 371 pages.

Review products

Caroline E. Foster, Global Regulatory Standards in Environmental and Health Disputes: Regulatory Coherence, Due Regard, and Due Diligence Oxford University Press, 2021, 371 pages.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2023

Henry Gao Open the ORCID record for Henry Gao [Opens in a new window]
Henry Gao*
Affiliation:
Singapore Management University
*
Email: henrygao@smu.edu.sg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , February 2024 , pp. 112 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The World Trade Organization

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

1 Glaeser, E.L. and Shleifer, A. (2003) ‘The Rise of the Regulatory State’, Journal of Economic Literature 41(2), 401–425Google Scholar.

2 Foster, at 24.

3 Ibid., at 87.

4 Ibid., 288–290.

5 Ibid., 290–293.

6 Glaeser and Shleifer, supra note 1.

7 United States Trade Representative, ‘Report on the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization’, February 2020, https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Report_on_the_Appellate_Body_of_the_World_Trade_Organization.pdf (accessed 4 August 2021)

8 Ibid, at 90–95.

9 Foster, at 285.

10 B. Hoekman and C. Sabel (2019) ‘Open Plurilateral Agreements, International Regulatory Cooperation and the WTO’, Global Policy, https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12694.

11 ‘WTO, Joint Initiatives’, www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/jsi_e/jsi_e.htm (accessed 3 January 2023).

12 ‘WTO, Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation’, www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/jsdomreg_e.htm (accessed 3 January 2023).

13 ‘Circulation of Draft Agreement Marks Major Milestone in Investment Facilitation Talks’, www.wto.org/english/news_e/news22_e/infac_16dec22_e.htm (accessed 3 January 2023).

14 For background on the US blockage, see H. Gao (2018) ‘Dictum on Dicta: Obiter Dicta in WTO Disputes’, World Trade Review 17, 509, 509–533; Weihuan, Z. and Gao, H. (2019) ‘“Overreaching” or “Overreacting”? Reflections on the Judicial Function and Approaches of WTO Appellate Body’, Journal of World Trade 53, 951, 951–978Google Scholar; Gao, H. (2021) ‘Finding a Rule-Based Solution to the Appellate Body Crisis: Looking Beyond the Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement’, Journal of International Economic Law 24(3), 534–550Google Scholar, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgab031.

15 See ‘Statement from USTR Spokesperson Adam Hodge’ (United States Trade Representative), http://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2022/december/statement-ustr-spokesperson-adam-hodge (accessed 3 January 2023). See also ‘Statement from USTR Spokesperson Adam Hodge’ (United States Trade Representative), http://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2022/december/statement-ustr-spokesperson-adam-hodge-0 (accessed 3 January 2023).