Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-bqjwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-05T09:10:18.499Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Part III - New Issue Areas and Dispute Settlement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 August 2021

Manfred Elsig
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Rodrigo Polanco
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Peter van den Bossche
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
International Economic Dispute Settlement
Demise or Transformation?
, pp. 295 - 370
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

References

Bodansky, D. 2015. “Reflections on the Paris Conference,” 15 December, http://opiniojuris.org/2015/12/15/reflections-on-the-paris-conference/.Google Scholar
Boute, A. 2012. “Combating Climate Change Through Investment Arbitration Changes,” Fordham International Law Journal 35(3): 613–64.Google Scholar
Del Río, P. and Mir-Artigues, P. 2014. “A Cautionary Tale: Spain’s Solar PV Investment Bubble,” Global Subsidies Initiative, International Institute for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Howse, R. 2010. Climate Mitigation Subsidies and the WTO Legal Framework: A Policy Analysis. Winnipeg, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Jha, V. 2012. “Trends in Investor Claims Over Feed-in Tariffs for Renewable Energy,” Investment Treaty News, 19 July, www.iisd.org/itn/2012/07/19/trends-in-investor-claims-over-feed-in-tariffs-for-renewable-energy/.Google Scholar
Jha, V. 2017. “Sunny Skies Ahead? Political Economy of Climate, Trade and Solar Energy in India,” Trade, Law and Development 9(2): 138–87.Google Scholar
Kent, A. and Jha, V. 2014. “Keeping Up with the Changing Climate: The WTO’s Evolutive Approach to Answer the Trade and Climate Conundrum,” Journal of World Investment and Trade 15(1–2): 245–71.Google Scholar
Kulovesi, K. 2014. “International Trade Disputes on Renewable Energy: Testing Ground for the Mutual Supportiveness of WTO Law and Climate Change Law,” Review of European Community and International Environmental Law 23(3): 342553.Google Scholar
Kuntze, J. and Moerenhout, T. 2013. Local Content Requirements and the Renewable Energy Industry – A Good Match? Geneva, Switzerland: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Leal-Arcas, R. and Filis, A. 2015. “Renewable Energy Disputes in the World Trade Organization,” Transnational Dispute Management 12(3): 151.Google Scholar
Lewis, J.I. 2014. “The Rise of Renewable Energy Protectionism: Emerging Trade Conflicts and Implications for Low Carbon Development,” Global Environmental Politics 14(4): 1035.Google Scholar
Mahalingam, A. and Reiner, D.M. 2016. “Energy Subsidies at Times of Economic Crisis: A Comparative Study and Scenario analysis of Italy and Spain,” EPRG Working Paper 1603, Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 1608, 23 January, available at: www.eprg.group.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/1603-PDF.pdf.Google Scholar
Mathews, J. et al. 2010. “Mobilizing Private Finance to Drive an Energy Industrial Revolution,” Energy Policy 38(7): 3263–5.Google Scholar
Matteotti, S. and Payosova, T. 2017. “The Role of the Fair and Equitable Treatment Standard: Regulatory Coherence for Trade and Investment in Renewable Energy.” In Cottier, T. and Espa, I., I. (Eds.), International Trade in Sustainable Electricity: Regulatory Challenges in International Economic Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 428–56.Google Scholar
Meyer, T. 2013. “Energy Subsidies and the World Trade Organization,” ASIL Insights, 10 September, www.asil.org/insights/volume/17/issue/22/energy-subsidies-and-world-trade-organization.Google Scholar
Meyer, T. 2015. “How Local Discrimination Can Promote Global Public Goods,” Boston University Law Review 95: 19392037.Google Scholar
Payosova, T. 2017. “Climate Change Mitigation and Renewable Energy.” In Cottier, T. and Schefer, K.N. (Eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of International Economic Law. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 625–7.Google Scholar
Peat, D. 2012. “The Perfect FIT: Lessons for Renewable Energy Subsidies in the World Trade Organization,” LSU Journal of Energy Law and Resources 1: 4366.Google Scholar
Polanco, R. 2017. “Integrating Trade, Investment and Climate Change.” In Cottier, T. and Schefer, K.N. (Eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of International Economic Law. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 634–6.Google Scholar
Polanco, R., de Sépibus, J. and Holzer, K. 2017. “TTIP and Climate Change: How Real Are Race to the Bottom Concerns?Carbon & Climate Law Review 3: 206–22.Google Scholar
Puig, S. 2014. “International Regime Complexity and Economic Law Enforcement,” Journal of International Economic Law 17(3): 491516.Google Scholar
Puig, S. 2015. “The Merging of International Trade and Investment Law,” Berkeley Journal of International Law 33(1): 159.Google Scholar
Puig, S. 2016. “Tobacco Litigation in International Courts,” Harvard International Law Journal 57(2): 383482.Google Scholar
Rajamani, R. 2015. “Paris Triumph,” The Indian Express, 16 December, http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/united-nations-paris-cliamte-agreement-triumph/.Google Scholar
Reuters 2019. “Spain Offers Green Energy Investors Incentives to Drop Lawsuits,” 22 November, www.reuters.com/article/us-spain-energy/spain-offers-green-energy-investors-incentives-to-drop-lawsuits-idUSKBN1XW1V1.Google Scholar
Reynoso, I. 2019. “Spain’s Renewable Energy Saga: Lessons for International Investment Law and Sustainable Development,” Investment Treaty News, 27 June, www.iisd.org/itn/2019/06/27/spains-renewable-energy-saga-lessons-for-international-investment-law-and-sustainable-development-isabella-reynoso/.Google Scholar
Rubini, L. 2012. “Ain’t Wastin’ Time No More: Subsidies for Renewable Energy, the SCM Agreement, Policy Space, and Law Reform,” Journal of International Economic Law 15(2): 525–79.Google Scholar
Shaffer, G. 2018. “A Tragedy in the Making? The Decline of Law and the Return of Power in International Trade Relations,” Yale Journal of International Law, 25 November.Google Scholar
Stavins, R.N. 2015. “Paris Agreement – A Good Foundation for Meaningful Progress,” 14 December, www.rff.org/blog/2015/paris-agreement-good-foundation-meaningful-progress.Google Scholar
Stephenson, S. 2013. Addressing Local Content Requirements in a Sustainable Energy Trade Agreement. Geneva, Switzerland: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. et al. 2013. “Building Blocks for Global Climate Protection,” Stanford Environmental Law Journal 32(2): 341–92.Google Scholar
Sykes, A.O. 2010. “The Questionable Case for Subsidies Regulation: A Comparative Perspective,” Journal of Legal Analysis 2(2): 473523.Google Scholar
Tienhaara, K. 2018. “Regulatory Chill in a Warming World: The Threat to Climate Policy Posed by Investor-State Dispute Settlement,” Transnational Environmental Law 7(2): 229–50.Google Scholar
UNFCCCa. 2015. “Adoption of the Paris Agreement,” FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1, 12 December, https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf.Google Scholar
UNFCCCb. 2015. “Synthesis Report on the Aggregate Effect of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions,” FCCC/CP/2015/7, 30 October, http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2006. “Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law,” Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, Finalized by Martti Koskenniemi. UN Doc A/CN.4/L.682 and Add.1 and Corr. 1, 13 April, http://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_l682.pdf.Google Scholar
Victor, D. 2015. “Why Paris Worked: A Different Approach to Climate Diplomacy,” 15 December, http://e360.yale.edu/feature/why_paris_worked_a_different_approach_to_climate_diplomacy/2940/.Google Scholar
Voon, T., Mitchell, A. and Munro, J. 2015. “Good Faith in Parallel Trade and Investment Disputes.” In Mitchell, A., Sornarajah, M. and Voon, T. (Eds.), Good Faith and International Economic Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 6087.Google Scholar
Wagner, M. 2014. “Regulatory Space in International Trade Law and International Investment Law,” University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 36: 187.Google Scholar
Wilke, M. 2011. Feed-in Tariffs for Renewable Energy and WTO Subsidy Rules: An Initial Legal Review. Geneva, Switzerland: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Wu, M. and Salzman, J. 2014. “The Next Generation of Trade and Environment Conflicts: The Rise of Green Industrial Policy,” Northwestern Law Review 108: 401–74.Google Scholar

References

Aaronson, S. 2015. “Why Trade Agreements Are Not Setting Information Free: The Lost History and Reinvigorated Debate over Cross-Border Data Flows, Human Rights, and National Security,” World Trade Review 14(4): 671700.Google Scholar
Ahmed, U. 2019. “The Importance of Cross-Border Regulatory Cooperation in an Era of Digital Trade,” World Trade Review 18(1): 99120.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. 2019. The Globotics Upheaval. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burri, M. and Polanco, R. 2020. “Digital Trade provisions in Preferential Trade Agreements: Introducing a New Dataset,” Journal of International Economic Law 23(1): 134.Google Scholar
Chander, A. 2019. “The Internet of Things: Both Goods and Services,” World Trade Review 18(1): 922.Google Scholar
Chander, A. and Le, U. 2014. “Breaking the Web: Data Localization vs. the Global Internet,” UC Davis legal Studies Research Paper Series, No. 378.Google Scholar
Chen, Y. 2015. “The EU Data Protection Law Reform: Challenges for Services Trade liberalization and Possible Approaches for Harmonizing Privacy Standards into the Context of GATS,” Spanish Yearbook of International Law 19: 211–20.Google Scholar
Drake, W. and Nicolaïdis, K. 2000. “Global Electronic Commerce and GATS: The Millennium Round and Beyond.” In Sauvé, P. and Stern, R. M. (Eds.), GATS 2000: New Directions in Services Trade Liberalization. Washington DC: Brookings Institution, pp. 399437.Google Scholar
Flowers, Z. 2019. “The Role of Precedent and Stare Decisis in the World Trade Organization’s Dispute Settlement Body,” International Journal of Legal Information 47(2): 90104.Google Scholar
Gari, G. 2018. “Recent Preferential Trade Agreements’ Disciplines for Tackling Regulatory Divergence in Services: How Far beyond GATS?World Trade Review 19(1): 129.Google Scholar
Haywood, K. 2016. “The Treatment of State Enterprises in the WTO and Preferential Trade Agreements,” Emerging Issues Briefing Note (3), March, London Commonwealth Secretariat, http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/StateOwned%20EnterprisesTPP1008.pdf. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Horn, H., Maggi, G. and Staiger, R. 2010. “Trade Agreements as Endogenously Incomplete Contracts,” American Economic Review 100(1): 394419.Google Scholar
Iakovleva, S. V. and Irion, K. 2016. “The Best of Both Worlds? Free Trade in Services and EU Law on Privacy and Data Protection,” European Data Protection Law Review 2(2): 191208.Google Scholar
Janow, M. and Mavroidis, P. 2019. “Digital Trade, E-Commerce, the WTO and Regional Frameworks,” World Trade Review 18(1): 17.Google Scholar
Kuner, C. 2011. “Regulation of Transborder Data Flows under Data Protection and Privacy Law: Past, Present and Future,” OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 187.Google Scholar
Latrille, P. and Lee, J. 2012. “Services Rules in Regional Trade Agreements: How Diverse and Creative Compared to the GATS Multilateral Rules?” WTO Staff Working Paper, ERSD-2012–19, www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201219_e.pdf. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Leblond, P. and Aaronson, S. 2019. “A Plurilateral ‘Single Data Area’ Is the Solution to Canada’s Data Trilemma,” CIGI Papers, No. 226.Google Scholar
Lionnet, P. 2018. Brexit: A Case-in-Point for a Single Market Treaty, Zurich: Schulthess 2018.Google Scholar
López González, J. and Ferencz, J. 2018. “Digital Trade and Market Openness,” OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 217, https://doi.org/10.1787/1bd89c9a-en. Accessed 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Manyika, J. et al. 2016. “Digital Globalization, The New Era of Global Flows,” McKinsey Global Institute.Google Scholar
Mattoo, A. and Sauvé, P. (Eds.) 2003. Domestic Regulation and Service Trade Liberalization, Washington, D.C.: The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
Meltzer, J. 2015. “A New Digital Trade Agenda, E15 Initiative,” International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and World Economic Forum, 2015. www.e15initiative.org/. Accessed 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Meltzer, J. 2019. “Governing Digital Trade,” World Trade Review 18(1): 2348.Google Scholar
Mishra, N. 2011. “Data Localization Laws in a Digital World, Data Protection or Data Protectionism,” The Public Sphere: Journal of Public Policy 4(1): 135–58.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A. 2001. “Towards Compatibility: The Future of Electronic Commerce within the Global Trading System,” Journal of International Economic Law 4(1): 683723.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A. and Hepburn, J. 2018. “Don’t Fence Me In: Reforming Trade and Investment Law to Better Facilitate Cross-Border Data Transfer,” Yale Journal of Law and Technology 19(1): 182237.Google Scholar
Monteiro, J.A. and Teh, R. 2017. “Provisions on Electronic Commerce in Regional Trade Agreements,” WTO Staff Working Paper, No. ERSD-2017–11, www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201711_e.htm. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Murray, A., 2018. Information Technology Law, fourth edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Neeraj, R. S. 2019. “Trade Rules for the Digital Economy, Charting New Waters at the WTO,” World Trade Review 18(1):121–41.Google Scholar
Polanco, R. and Sauvé, R. 2018. “The Treatment of Regulatory Convergence in Preferential Trade Agreements,” World Trade Review 17(4): 575607.Google Scholar
Reidenberg, J. 2001. “E-Commerce and Trans-Atlantic Privacy,” The Houston Law Review 38: 717–49.Google Scholar
Roy, M. 2014. “Services Commitments in Preferential Agreements: Surveying the Empirical Landscape.” In Sauvé, P. and Shingal, A. (Eds.), The Preferential Liberalization of Trade in Services: Comparative Regionalism, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 1536.Google Scholar
Roy, M. 2016. “Charting the Evolving Landscape of Services Trade Policies: Recent Patterns of Protection and Liberalization.” In Sauvé, P. and Roy, M. (Eds.), Research Handbook on Trade in Services, London: Edward Elgar, pp. 2541.Google Scholar
Roy, M. 2019. “Elevating Services: Services Trade Policy, WTO Commitments, and their Role in Economic Development and Trade Integration,” G-24 Working Paper, Washington, D.C.: Intergovernmental Group of Twenty-Four, www.g24.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Roy_G24_paper__Jan_2019.pdf. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Roy, M., Marchetti, J. and Lim Aik, H. 2006. “Services Liberalization in the New Generation of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs): How Much Further than the GATS?” WTO Staff Working Paper, ERSD-2006–07, World Trade Organization, www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd200607_e.pdf. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Roy, M., Sauvé, P. and Shingal, A. 2017. “Do WTO+ Commitments in Services Agreements Reflect a Quest for Regulatory Convergence? Evidence from Asia,” The World Economy 10(11): 123–50.Google Scholar
Sauvé, P. and Shingal, A. 2014. “Reflections on the Nature of Preferences on Services.” In Sauvé, P. and Shingal, A. (Eds.), The Preferential Liberalization of Services Markets: Comparative Regionalism, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 410–12.Google Scholar
Shapiro, E. 2003. “All Is Not Fair in the Privacy Trade: The Safe Harbor Agreement and the World Trade Organization,” Fordham Law Review 71(6): 2781–821.Google Scholar
Vidigal, G. 2019. “WTO Adjudication and the Security Exception: Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed – Something Blue?Legal Issues of Economic Integration 46(3): 203–24.Google Scholar
Weber, R. 2015. “Digital Trade and E-Commerce: Challenges and Opportunities of the Asia-Pacific Regionalism,” Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy 10(2): 321–48.Google Scholar
Weber, R. 2012. “Regulatory Autonomy and Privacy Standards under the GATS,” Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy 7(1): 2548.Google Scholar
Willems, A. and Kamau, M. 2019. “Of Binding Provisions and Trust Marks; Roadmap to a Global Legal Framework for the Digital Economy,” Legal Issues of Economic Integration 46(3): 225–46.Google Scholar
Wu, M. 2017. “Digital Trade-Related Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Existing Models and Lessons for the Multilateral Trade System,” RTA Exchange. Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), www.rtaexchange.org/. Accessed on 1 April 2020.Google Scholar
Wu, T. 2006. “The World Trade Law of Censorship and Internet Filtering,” Chicago Journal of International Law 7(1): 263–87.Google Scholar
Zhang, N. 2019. “Trade Commitments and Data Flows: The National Security Wildcard,” World Trade Review 18(1): 4962.Google Scholar
Zhou, W. and Gao, H. 2019. “‘Overreaching’ or ‘Overreacting’? Reflections on the Judicial Function and Approaches of WTO Appellate Body,” Journal of World Trade 53(6): 951–78.Google Scholar

References

Alford, R. 2013. “The Convergence of International Trade and Investment Arbitration,” Santa Clara International Law Journal 12: 3563.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. and Claussen, K. 2019. “The Legal Authority Behind Trump’s New Tariffs on Mexico,” Lawfare, June 3, 2019, www.lawfareblog.com/legal-authority-behind-trumps-new-tariffs-mexico.Google Scholar
Ben-Shahar, O. and Bradford, A. 2013. “Reversible Rewards,” American Law & Economics Review 15(1): 156–86.Google Scholar
Bronckers, M. and Gruni, G. 2019. “Improving the Enforcement of Labour Standards in the EU’s Free Trade Agreements.” In Prévost, D., Alexovičová, I. and Pohl, J. H. (Eds.), Restoring Trust in Trade: Liber Amicorum in Honour of Peter Van den Bossche Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 157–72.Google Scholar
Chayes, A. and Chayes, A. 1995. The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Claussen, K. 2018. “Separation of Trade Law Powers,” Yale Journal of International Law 43(2): 315–53.Google Scholar
Claussen, K. 2020. “Reimagining Trade-plus Compliance: The Labor Story,” Journal of International Economic Law 23(1): 2543.Google Scholar
Curi, M. 2019. “Neal: USTR ‘Favorably’ Received USMCA Working Group’s Counterproposal,” Inside U.S. Trade.Google Scholar
Gruni, G. 2020. “The Unsustainable Lightness of Enforcement Procedures: Environmental Standards in the EU-Mercosur FTA,” blogdroiteuropéen.com (May 13, 2020), https://blogdroiteuropeen.com/2020/05/13/the-unsustainable-lightness-of-enforcement-procedures-environmental-standards-in-the-eu-mercosur-fta-by-giovanni-gruni/.Google Scholar
Hamilton, C. and Rochwerger, P. 2005. “Trade and Investment: Foreign Direct Investment Through Bilateral and Multilateral Treaties,” New York International Law Review 18(1): 160.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. 1997. The World Trading System, 2nd edition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Katz, R. 2016. “Modeling an International Investment Court After the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body,” Harvard Negotiation and Law Review 22: 163–88.Google Scholar
Kolben, K. 2004. “Trade, Monitoring, and the ILO: Working to Improve Conditions in Cambodia’s Garment Factories,” Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal 7(1): 79107.Google Scholar
Krist, W. 2013. Globalization and America’s Trade Agreements. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press with Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Manak, I. 2019. “Enforcing International Trade Law in the World Trade Organization’s Committees: Courting Third Party Opinion,” A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Government, https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/1057304/Manak_georgetown_0076D_14424.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.Google Scholar
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 2019a. USTR Requests First-Ever Environment Consultations Under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA), January 4, 2019, https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2019/january/ustr-requests-first-ever. Accessed January 20, 2020.Google Scholar
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 2019b. USTR Successfully Resolves Concerns Raised in First-Ever Environment Consultations Under the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA), April 9, 2019, https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/april/ustr-successfully-resolves-concerns. Accessed January 20, 2020.Google Scholar
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 2019c. USTR Announces Enforcement Action to Block Illegal Timber Imports from Peru, https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2019/july/ustr-announces-enforcement-action. Accessed January 20, 2020.Google Scholar
Sarooshi, D. 2014. “Investment Treaty Arbitration and the World Trade Organization: What Role for Systemic Values in the Resolution of International Economic Disputes?Texas International Law Journal 49(3): 445–68.Google Scholar
Schott, J. 1994. The Uruguay Round: An Assessment, Peterson Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
Steger, D. and Hainsworth, S. 1998. “World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement: The First Three Years,” Journal of International Economic Law 1(2): 199226.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. and Meyer, M. 1997. The New Rules of Global Trade: A Guide to the World Trade Organization, Toronto: Carswell Legal Pubns.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Labor 2015. US and Honduras Sign Landmark Labor Rights Agreement, December 9, 2015, www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/ilab/ilab20151209. Accessed January 20, 2020.Google Scholar
U.S. Food and Drug Administration 2017. Foreign Food Facility Inspection Program, November 28, 2017, www.fda.gov/food/food-inspection-programs/foreign-food-facility-inspection-program. Accessed January 20, 2020.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×