PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11193639

International trade. Multinational aspects.

Abstract

Of numerous regional economic agreements, the European Union (EU), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), South American Common Market (MERCOSUR), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the Australia-New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Agreement are examples that are actively pursuing regional integration for freer trade of animals and animal products. The World Trade Organization (WTO) believes that regional and multinational integration initiatives are complements rather than alternatives in the pursuit of more open trade. In the efforts to harmonize SPS standards among multilateral trading nations, it is recommended that national requirements meet the standards developed by the OIE and the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission as the minimum requirements rather than adopting the standards of the lowest common denominator. Regional grouping may hinder multilateral or bilateral trade between the countries of a group and those of the other groups. How to eliminate such non-tariff barriers as traditional trade custom remains to be examined. Ongoing activities of VICH (Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medical Products) may pave the way for more open trade in pharmaceutical products between multilateral regional groups.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Y Ozawa. 2000. International trade. Multinational aspects.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11193639/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the published literature for controlled studies comparing learning outcomes of traditional methods that require the terminal use of animals (eg, dissection, live-animal surgery, and live-animal laboratory demonstrations) with outcomes obtained with alternative teaching methods. DESIGN: Systematic review. STUDY POPULATION: Controlled studies published between 1996 and 2004. PROCEDURES: PubMed was searched with the following keywords, used alone and in combination: educational alternatives, nonlethal teaching methods, veterinary alternatives, medical education, and nonterminal animal use. Cited references of retrieved reports were reviewed to identify additional reports. Reports were selected for review only if a comparison group was included. RESULTS: 17 studies that were randomized controlled trials or nonrandomized trials that included a comparison group were identified. Five involved veterinary students, 3 involved medical students, 6 involved university undergraduate students, and 3 involved high school biology students. Sample size ranged from 14 to 283 students. Eleven studies appeared to be randomized, parallel-group trials, 4 involved comparative groups to which participants were not randomly assigned or for which the randomization process was not clear, 1 was a 2-period crossover study, and 1 involved a retrospective review of grades. In all 17 studies reviewed, results associated with the alternative method of instruction were not significantly different from or superior to results associated with the conventional method. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although the number of controlled studies identified was small, the results seem to support more widespread adoption of alternative teaching methods in biomedical education.

Animal Welfare↗