United States - Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Canada and Mexico (WT/DS384, WT/DS386): Reports of the Appellate Body
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The United States, Canada, and Mexico each appeals certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed in the Panel Reports, United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements – Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Canada and Mexico (Panel Reports). The Panel was established pursuant to Article 21.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) to consider challenges by Canada and Mexico (the complainants) of measures taken by the United States to comply with the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in the original proceedings in US – COOL (DS384 and DS386). These disputes concern country of origin labelling (COOL) of meat products. The products at issue are imported Canadian cattle and hogs and imported Mexican cattle, which are used in the United States to produce beef and pork. In the original proceedings, the Appellate Body upheld the panel's finding under Article 2.1 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) that the “original COOL measure” modified the conditions of competition in the US market to the detriment of imported livestock by creating an incentive in favour of processing exclusively domestic livestock and a disincentive against handling imported livestock. Furthermore, the Appellate Body upheld the original panel's ultimate conclusion that the original COOL measure was inconsistent with Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement because it accorded less favourable treatment to imported livestock than to like domestic livestock. Moreover, the Appellate Body reversed the panel's finding that the original COOL measure was inconsistent with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement. The Appellate Body found that the panel properly identified the legitimate objective of the original COOL measure as being “to provide consumer information on origin”. However, it concluded that the panel had erred in its interpretation and application of Article 2.2 in finding the original COOL measure to be inconsistent with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.012 |
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".