Barriers To Trade

The pressure equipment directive was adopted by the European Parliament and the European Council in May 1997. It harmonises the national laws of the 15 Member States of the European Union relating to equipment subject to the pressure risk. That directive is one of the series of technical harmonisation directives such as for machinery, medical devices, simple pressure vessels, gas appliances and so on, which were foreseen by the Communities programme for the elimination of technical barriers to trade. It therefore aims to ensure the free placing on the market and putting into service of the equipment concerned within the European Union and the European Economic Area. At the same time it permits a flexible regulatory environment, allowing European industry to develop new techniques increasing thereby its international competitiveness. 

Conformity with EU international obligations under the WTO. Obviously, the policy should not introduce illegal or mmecessary barriers to trade. 

The national drag register functions as a technical barrier to trade. This conclusion is partly related to the fact that after eight years of efforts the pharmaceutical industry was considered to be the single European market s greatest failure. 

A description is given of the initiatives carried out within the European Community for the harmonization of fire testing. The technical and economic reasons are explained for such initiatives, which are taken in order to remove barriers to trade from the European internal market. Of the various fire aspects, only fire reaction testing is taken into consideration here, because it appears as a major technical obstacle to the free circulation of construction materials. All possible approaches are considered for the attainment of such a harmonization and one, the so called interim solution, is fully described. The proposed interim solution, is based on the adoption of three fundamental test methods, i.e. the British "Surface Spread of Flame", the French "Epiradiateur" and the German "Brandschacht", and on the use of a rather complicated "transposition document", which should allow to derive most of the national classifications from the three test package. 

The Single European Act /1/, effective from 1 July 1987, commits all the twelve countries of the European Economic Community to remove all barriers to trade by 31 December 1992. 

The "technical barriers to trade" formed by "reaction to fire" requirements are represented by ... 

However, the differences between the national test methods are considered to be the major barrier to trade. Whilst the harmonization of test and classification systems is insufficient on its own to provide for a free market, it is undoubtedly a necessary condition to it. Without a common method of evaluating the fire behaviour, there is no basis for a common regulatory specification. 

National Tests. It is clearly possible to remove the technical barrier to trade represented by different national fire test procedures, by providing a facility for a manufacturer to conduct the relevant tests once and within his home country, with a guarantee of acceptability of the results by all Member States. This requires laboratories to equip themselves with all the necessary equipment and for an extensive interlaboratory collaboration and calibration procedure to be introduced, which would ensure mutual acceptance of test results. 

The inconsistent or conflicting regulation of new chemicals probably represents the most obvious manner in which the PMN laws can create barriers to trade. Given the fundamental differences between the U.S. and European PMN programs, as well as the inherent self-interests involved because the EEC and the U.S. are... 

Limit tests have a long standing in pharmacopeias. For some, heavy metals for example, the sensitivity of the method was the basis for the standard. Modem limits in the USP-NF are toxicity based. There is divergence in harmonization because of toxicity-based rather than method-based standards. The modem basis avoids the exclusion of safe products from the marketplace, whereas the older approach could lead to lock-out specifications known as technical barriers to trade. 

International agreements and regional cooperation e.g. GATT, European Acquis, specify the requirements for the free movement of goods and the elimination of technical barriers to trade, mutual recognition of test results and technical harmonization, in order to meet the needs of the market. The quality concept is being broadened to include additional aspects, tools and procedures. 

To reduce barriers to trade the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development worked on that topic and pnblished its first decision in 1981. To introduce an internationally accepted system in all countries the OECD pnblished Cuides for Compliance Monitoring Procednies for CLP and Cnidance for the Conduct of Laboratory Inspections and Stndy Audits in 1989 which ate binding for all OECD member states. 

The primary objective of laboratory personnel is to prodnce qnality resnlts that are mutually accepted. The harmonization of the laboratories to the CLP principles will benefit the global economy by the avoidance of the technical barriers to trade and the duplication of analytical determinations. In addition, CLP will improve the quality of life via the protection of human health and the enviromnent. 

Comparable quality of test data forms the basis for the mutual acceptance of data among countries. If individual countries can confidently rely on test data developed in other countries, duplicative testing can be avoided, thereby saving time and resources. The application of these principles should help to avoid the creation of technical barriers to trade, and further improve the protection of human health and the environment. GLP principles are explicitly presented below. 

Despite the emphasis of the legislation on safety, an equally important basic purpose of the legislation relates to the EEA s commerce and the economy. All Directives have as a basic purpose the creation of a European internal market without internal barriers to trade and with a single harmonised set of laws governing the placing of a product on the market and its free movement within the market. ... 

Reduce technical barriers to trade arising from lack of traceability and equivalence. 

The ruling Swedish political establishment is, of course, well aware that issuing restrictions based on its own extremist version of the PP may cause serious international complications. In particular, the EU Commission as well as the WTO can be expected to raise objections about Sweden introducing non-tariff barriers to trade. To head off complaints appearing before the European Court of Justice and WTO, Sweden has devised various subtle means to circumvent its international obligations under, for instance, the articles on the Free Movement of Goods as stipulated by the 1957 Treaty of Rome. 

In September, 1986, the United States raised the EU hormone ban in the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). In 1987, after a series of informal bilateral discussions, the United States invoked dispute settlement under the Tokyo Round Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. Formal bilateral consultations were held on two occasions without a satisfactory resolution. The United States then requested that the matter be referred to a group of technical experts. The European Union blocked the formation of the technical expert group, and the dispute went unresolved. 

WTO 1994. Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. World Trade Organization, Geneva. 

The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (WTO-SPS, 1994) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (WTO-TBT, 1994) recognise as the international standards, guidelines and... 

---