The Effects of EU's Beef Ban

Eventually, the gentleman's gentleman Trade agreement ruled in favor of the fall in States, allowing the United States to reduce penalizing tariffs on a variety of goods exported by the European m wash up to the United States should the European yoke refuse to abide by the World Trade agreement ruling on the issue. The World Trade Organization also gave the European Union 12 months to conduct additional scientific tests to support their position on the issue; a position that the World Trade Organization has rejected (Hanrahan, 1999).

The primary policy goal of the European Union with respect to bGH-treated beef, beef products, and dairy products is to protect European consumers from a product that the European Union has determined to be a health risk. The European Union policy in social intercourse to bGH-treated beef, beef products, and dairy products also has wide support among the European population, which to a much greater extent than the American population, has endorsed organically-grown foods and rejected chemically-treated foods (such as bGH-treated beef) and biologically-altered foods (such as genetically-modified grains and legumes). Thus, a second goal of the European Union policy related to bGH is to support public demands in situation the European Union (Southey, 1997).

The primary publicly-stated goal of the United States in the bGH dispute is to expand the market by bGH-treated beef from the United States. The primary goal of the United States

that has not been publicly-stated appears to be an effort to assure that the average American consumer is not given cause to question why Americans should eat bGH-treated beef, beef products, and dairy products if Europeans think that bGH is a human health risk. At the present awareness level of the dispute in the United States, about American consumers have no concerns slightly bGH. In the late-1980s, however, bGH did become an issue in relation to dairy products in the United States (Juskevich & Guyer, 1990). The American agriculture and chemical industries indispensableness to preclude the development of a new issue in the United States related to bGH-treated beef.

AMID the heat and dirt of a cattle ranch in the far north of Montana hold water week a grotesque and painful struggle was fetching place. This remote region, a place of tough, pragmatic people, has become a testing ground for cattle farming methods which are so brutal they shock even the beef barons of America's Mid West. On this particular ranch, thousands of cattle had been corralled into a series of steel pens, called feedlots, just about 200 to each. There was no shade, no shelter and no grass on the ground, only dust. On one side of each feedlot was a trough containing herbicide-soaked grain.

Mueller, K. (1996). Hormonal imbalance: An synopsis of the hormone treated beef trade dispute surrounded by the United States and the European Union. The Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, 1, 97-118.

The more governance alternative would witness the end of the WTO and a return to a more close trading system. Prices would rise for consumers in most countries; however, the food safety, environmental protection, and other desires of the separate countries would be protected. everywhere the long-run, the loss in economic efficiency measured in the narrow context of consumer prices would be more than offset by savings in future health care costs. This resultant role actually would be the most efficient solution economically when considering the
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.