Climate Change, Regulatory Policy and the WTO: How Constraining are Trade Rules?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change has come to be seen as a major global environmental challenge. This paper examines the extent to which WTO rules constrain countries' ability to address climate change through domestic regulatory policies such as standards, labels, voluntary agreements and domestic emissions trading programs. In particular, it examines three broad types of constraints. First, it discusses the extent to which domestic regulatory measures may conflict with national treatment provisions of GATT and the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. Second, it discusses procedural constraints on domestic regulatory action, including from requirements related to scientific evidence. Finally, it discusses the "necessity" or least restrictive means tests under GATT and the TBT Agreement. The paper argues that existing WTO rules provide members with some scope to take action on climate change. However, they do constrain domestic regulatory policy and the debate about future institutional changes will be central to how effectively global environmental issues such as climate change will be addressed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".