On The Conflict And Coordination Between EU REACH And GATT/WTO

The economic development of the European Union (EU) has attracted the world attention, while at the same time it has also emerged as a leader in legal systems innovations which may have global impact and are often copied elsewhere. The latest example is its innovative regulation of chemicals that is called Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), adopted on Dec.12,2006 after more than ten-year hard work. In place of more than 40 pre-existing regulations and directives, REACH, as the landmark legislation for regulating chemicals, relates to various aspects of chemicals production, safety and trade with sophisticated and conflicting interests involved in it.On the one hand, REACH seeks to reduce the harm produced by chemicals and pursue economic and social sustainable development since its primary purpose is to safeguard human health and environment, while on the other hand REACH will definitely lead to transformation of chemicals regulations and exert great influence on other nations the world wide. The arguments against and for REACH have never ended during the course of its enactment.It is a heatedly debated topic both in theory and practice in recent years on how to understand and deal with REACH. Among which one of the hot issues in legal society is about the conflict and coordination between REACH and international trade rules of GATT and WTO. The purpose of this paper is to analyze in detail the relation between REACH and GATT/WTO and then put forward advice on how to response to REACH and improve chemicals regulation in China today. In general, this paper consists of five chapters with more than 48,000 words.Chapter one, being the introduction to the study, makes clear the purpose, content and significance of this paper based on a brief comment on the current research on this topic. Generally speaking, current legal literatures pay more attention to the conflict between REACH and WTO while less to their coordination. Moreover, current study is short of empirical analysis and also lacking is the influence of REACH on chemical legislations of other nations. In contrast, this paper, with focus on conflict as well as coordination between REACH and WTO, attempts to research from different perspectives which may lead to innovative conclusions.Chapter two surveys the background and the course of making of REACH and analyses its main characteristics compared to pre-existing legislations. REACH was out of concerns for the shortcomings of pre-legislations which are both complicated and ineffective, leading to lack of safety information on a large quantity of chemicals due to slow risk evaluation. Also badly needed are liability systems and innovation incentives. The making of REACH is a complex process with conflicting interests involved. Nevertheless, many defects of pre-legislations have been made up by REACH which, based on the principle of "no data, no market", strengthens market access and availability of safety information on chemicals by way of registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction. In addition, REACH makes a breakthrough by shifting responsibility for proving chemical safety from the government agencies to chemical industry. The comprehensive chemicals regulation systems has thus come into being and the EU has entered a new era of chemicals regulation.Chapter three examines the potential conflicts between REACH and WTO which include: whether the broad coverage and complex requirements of REACH will discriminate non-EU producers and thus contradict with the national treatment principle; whether REACH will be against the least trade barrier principle due to the expensive costs for registration and evaluation; whether it contradicts with international efforts and standards for management of chemical risks; whether it does not give full consideration to developing nations and goes against the principle of preferential treatment under WTO.Chapter four discusses the conformity of REACH with WTO. First, REACH complies with sustainable development principle that is demonstrated in its legislative purpose, basic principles and concrete provisions. Second, REACH is in conformity with basic principles of WTO and does not go against national treatment principle and the least trade barrier principle. Third, the main purpose of REACH is to protect human health and environment which conforms to exceptions set by WTO. Finally, the greening of WTO dispute resolution will further support justifications for REACH.Chapter five analyses the influence of, responses to, and lessons from REACH. REACH will facilitate chemicals regulation transformation and exert great influence on China export of chemicals. In response to these challenges, the government, industry and associated organizations will work together, and the most important measure to be taken is to pursue technology innovations by industry. Only by cooperation and faithful efforts will Chinese chemicals improve international competitiveness in the world market. Drawing lessons from the EU experiences, we should try to reform chemicals regulation, realize unity of management systems, incorporate precautionary principle, improve risk evaluation, establish incentives for chemicals management and facilitate access to information and public participation.