Increasing Protection of GIS at the WTO: Clawbacks, Greenfields and Monopoly Rents

Currently there are proposals and negotiations regarding the strengthening of protection for geographic indicators (GIs) in the WTO. A major proponent of stronger protection for GIs has been the European Union. One of the arguments it has put forward for stronger protection has been that it will provide an avenue for economic development for agricultural producers in developing countries – a way to capture rents in the markets of developed countries. This paper first outlines the proposed changes to the international protection of geographic indicators. Second, the potential for groups of producers to generate and capture rents in foreign markets is assessed under differing assumptions pertaining to industry structure, product differentiation in the short and long run, barriers to entry reputation and the form of legal protection in importing countries. A discussion of the resource requirements to establish and maintain a GI is also provided.Agricultural and Food Policy, International Development, International Relations/Trade, WTO, GIS,

Post-Moratorium EU Regulation of Generically Modified Products: Trade Concerns

EU, GMO, trade, Agribusiness, Agricultural and Food Policy, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, International Relations/Trade,

Post-Moratorium EU Regulation of Genetically Modified Products: Trade Concerns

Trade in genetically modified (GM) products remains a major issue in agricultural trade policy. In particular, the European Union has sought to deny market access to GM-products. In the wake of a WTO case brought by Canada and the US, among others, against an import ban imposed on genetically modified agricultural products by the European Union (EU) – which the EU lost – the import ban was dropped and the EU put in place a new regulatory regime for GM-products. The EU suggests that the post-moratorium regulatory regime is compliant with its WTO obligations. As of June 2011, the operation of this new import regime has not been formally assessed. The first GM-crops are just now working their way through the post-moratorium regulatory system and an assessment of the operation of the regime is timely. The results of this assessment suggest that the EU’s approval system is only partially based in science and thus is not in conformity with its SPS obligations under the WTO. Hence, the new EU regulatory regime could be challenged through a WTO Disputes panel.EU regulatory regime, Genetically Modified (GM) products, Science, SPS, Agribusiness, Agricultural and Food Policy, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, International Relations/Trade,

Post-Moratorium EU Regulation of Genetically Modified Products: Triffid Flax

The regulatory regime for contamination permits the imposition of import bans with neither a scientific justification nor a risk assessment. No scientific assessment of Triffid flax was done prior to the import ban. The import regime put in place to deal with the contamination of flax with the GM-flax CDC Triffid provides no rationale for the thresholds of safety established for the testing regime. The EU is consistently pushing for commercial, economic and social considerations to be included, along with science, in decision-making. Such considerations are often perceived as avenues for economic protection to creep into EU decision-making. Such considerations can, however, cut both ways. The Canada-EU testing regime for Triffid makes provision for, but does not necessarily require, the testing of cargoes when they reach European ports (Western Producer, 2010). The risks associated with inspection upon arrival made exports to Europe too risky. By only requiring the passing of the tests prior to product leaving Canada, flexibility to find alternative markets for contaminated cargoes has been gained. Thus, while costly, the testing regime for flax exports to the EU has allowed for the resumption of Canadian flax exports to the EU. Of course, the import Protocol negotiated between the EU and Canada was a one off. In a future case, economic and commercial considerations could be used to bolster economic protection. This is why science was agreed upon as the arbitrator of SPS-based trade barriers by the Member States of the WTO, including the EU. Thus, the EU regulatory regime for GM-products would seem open to a new challenge at the WTO. Of course, the political consequences of such a challenge would have to be carefully weighed.GMO, food, EU, Triffid Flax, Agribusiness, Agricultural and Food Policy, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, International Relations/Trade,

ALIX binds a YPX(3)L motif of the GPCR PAR1 and mediates ubiquitin-independent ESCRT-III/MVB sorting.

The sorting of signaling receptors to lysosomes is an essential regulatory process in mammalian cells. During degradation, receptors are modified with ubiquitin and sorted by endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT)-0, -I, -II, and -III complexes into intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) of multivesicular bodies (MVBs). However, it remains unclear whether a single universal mechanism mediates MVB sorting of all receptors. We previously showed that protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1), a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) for thrombin, is internalized after activation and sorted to lysosomes independent of ubiquitination and the ubiquitin-binding ESCRT components hepatocyte growth factor-regulated tyrosine kinase substrate and Tsg101. In this paper, we report that PAR1 sorted to ILVs of MVBs through an ESCRT-III-dependent pathway independent of ubiquitination. We further demonstrate that ALIX, a charged MVB protein 4-ESCRT-III interacting protein, bound to a YPX(3)L motif of PAR1 via its central V domain to mediate lysosomal degradation. This study reveals a novel MVB/lysosomal sorting pathway for signaling receptors that bypasses the requirement for ubiquitination and ubiquitin-binding ESCRTs and may be applicable to a subset of GPCRs containing YPX(n)L motifs

Notes

Notes by John E. Lindberg, Lawrence S. May, Clifford A. Goodrich, William T. Huston, Louis Albert Hafner, Robert A. Stewart, Benedict R. Danko, and James D. Matthews

AP-3 regulates PAR1 ubiquitin-independent MVB/lysosomal sorting via an ALIX-mediated pathway

The sorting of signaling receptors within the endocytic system is important for appropriate cellular responses. After activation, receptors are trafficked to early endosomes and either recycled or sorted to lysosomes and degraded. Most receptors trafficked to lysosomes are modified with ubiquitin and recruited into an endosomal subdomain enriched in hepatocyte growth factor–regulated tyrosine kinase substrate (HRS), a ubiquitin-binding component of the endosomal-sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) machinery, and then sorted into intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) of multivesicular bodies (MVBs)/lysosomes. However, not all receptors use ubiquitin or the canonical ESCRT machinery to sort to MVBs/lysosomes. This is exemplified by protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR1), a G protein–coupled receptor for thrombin, which sorts to lysosomes independent of ubiquitination and HRS. We recently showed that the adaptor protein ALIX binds to PAR1, recruits ESCRT-III, and mediates receptor sorting to ILVs of MVBs. However, the mechanism that initiates PAR1 sorting at the early endosome is not known. We now report that the adaptor protein complex-3 (AP-3) regulates PAR1 ubiquitin-independent sorting to MVBs through an ALIX-dependent pathway. AP-3 binds to a PAR1 cytoplasmic tail–localized tyrosine-based motif and mediates PAR1 lysosomal degradation independent of ubiquitination. Moreover, AP-3 facilitates PAR1 interaction with ALIX, suggesting that AP-3 functions before PAR1 engagement of ALIX and MVB/lysosomal sorting

From wrongdoing to imprisonment: Test of a causal-moral model

The authors tested a causal–moral model of punishment in which (a) causal attribution and moral responsibility are distinct precursors of punishment, and (b) dispositional attribution leads to blame which, in turn, determines imprisonment. Specifically, whereas severity of outcome impacts punishment directly, circumstances of the crime and the culture of the observers impact punishment through causal attribution and blame, respectively. In an experiment, Singaporeans and Americans read about a crime that (a) was committed intentionally or under an extenuating circumstance and (b) had low or severe outcome for the victim. They made dispositional attribution to, assigned blame to, and recommended imprisonment for the offender. Results supported the hypotheses and the causal–moral path model that specified a direct effect of severity of outcome, an indirect effect of country via blame, and the indirect effects of circumstance via dispositional attribution to blame on imprisonment