The shrimp turtle case grp6
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

The shrimp turtle case grp6



WTO case: dispute between US and Developing countries on shrimp import ban imposed by US.

WTO case: dispute between US and Developing countries on shrimp import ban imposed by US.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Mrkts for shrimp imports – biggest mktsUS japan, biggestDeveloped counties are biggest mktsUS is more atractive mkt since japan fishing mkt was in decline
  • Thailand highest exporter and other developing countries
  • India strong wild life protection, CITES – convention on international trsde of endandgered speciesWorship = form of lord vishnuBengal – they eat itOMFR – prohibits catching/harassment/of turtlesTSD – better than TED, does not loose 20% - bars are wider
  • Fuel cost – 16% diesel hike, more weight = more fuel Destabilizer- ship gets strandedRoyalty – pay royalty due to patentNon-ex – alternatives to TEDSeasonal – breeding/nesting season ban trawling BUT shrimp catch high in this seasonArea closure – 20km tak fishing ban
  • Haram haramharam = sinEnclose beaches wher hatching and nesting takes place/ traingprog to explain Saved 1.5 million eggs from 1979 to 1990s
  • Fishery act – ban of any sort of turtle tradeMonarch – shinowatra5000 hatchlings released after rearing
  • 1927 – reaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllly earlyLegislations protecting turtles
  • Malysia has 13 states1st to say developed got 5yrs to implement TEDs
  • Aquaculture – shrimp in farms, larva baby bred..Aq started becoming popular in coming yrsAqua does not affect turtle esp. thailand
  • Loggerheads eat everydamn thing like tar!Jelly fish – like plasticOrganic minerals/pollutants – marine pollutantsNest – area wher they come to breed
  • Airbus – europeNoth tryiin gto ban shrimpsDumping – import is lower selling Thai is Dumping on US
  • China was biggest – primarily domesticalyDeveloping countries biggest producers of shrimpThailand was 2nd biggest producer

The shrimp turtle case grp6 The shrimp turtle case grp6 Presentation Transcript

  • The Shrimp Turtle CaseDeveloping Nations PerspectiveSubmitted to:- Dr. R. Roy Chowdhury
    Group 6 :-
    Ambuj Singh (10PGDM066)
    Gaurav Gupta(10PGDM76)
    Raka De(10PGDM097)
    Subhojoy Chanda(10PGDM108)
    Vineet Saxena(10PGDM118)
  • Chronology
    1991 and 1993 Guidelines violated Section 609
    1996 Guidelines: Extended the scope of Section 609
    India, Malaysia, Pakistan and Thailand took this matter to dispute settlement at the WTO.
  • Introduction
    The sudden move of U.S shrimp import restrictions, hurt the developing nations
    Four months to adopt the new technology standards.
     Process versus product issue.
  • Trade of Shrimps Imports
  • Trade of Shrimps – Exports
  • Eco-imperialism
    Industrialized countries : international species conservation
    Developing countries: Development
    Should the U.S be allowed to impose its environmental standards on other countries?
    Don’t such policies put an unfair burden on developing countries?
  • Non-Tariff Barriers
    WTO disallowed discrimination among member country products.
    Unilateral regulation as a condition of entry(non-tariff barrier).
    “Judicial activism” undermines the ability of developing countries to participate in international policy formation.
  • India
    5 of 7 species
    CITES, the Indian Wildlife Protection Act of 1972
    The Orissa Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1982
  • India
    Reluctance towards TEDs
    30 per cent of catch is lost
    Increased fuel cost
    Non-exclusionary approach
    Seasonal ban
    Area closure
  • Pakistan
    Culture-sin to kill turtles
    1950 Legislation-Imports and Exports (Control) Act
    Illegal to export protected species
    1979-Pakistan's Sindh Wildlife Dept
    Training programmes
    Enclosure on beaches
    TEDs not the only way
  • Thailand
    1947 Fisheries Act of Thailand
    Wild Animals Conservation and Protection Act 1992
    Drawing trawls-prohibited
    Seasonal Ban
  • Malaysia
    4 species of sea turtle found
    Turtle conservation measures started as early as 1927
    Fishery Act, 1985
    Other legislations: The Turtle TrustOrdinance (1957), the Turtle Rules (1962), the Wildlife Protection Ordinance(1958)
  • Malaysia
    Legislation for 13 individual states
    Established Turtle Sanctuaries
    Shrimping operations far from turtle nesting and breeding areas (Sabah & Sarwak)
    First raised the issue ‘unjustifiable discrimination’
  • Southern Environmentalist’s View
    Justified objectives : Wrong approach
    Extend ban to those shrimps that are produced in environmentally damaging aquaculture farms.
  • Annual World Shrimp Production, 1980-2005
    • The U.S, before imposing the ban had not raised the issue in the CITES conferences.
    • It had not signed the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species.
    • It had not signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea or ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity.
    • US is the world’s biggest polluter and destructor of environment.
    U.S Inaction
  • Threats Aside From Trawlers
    Oil Spills & Pollution
    20% of the hatchlings studied had ingested tar near Florida’s mid-Atlantic Coast (2002)
    26 spills – Gulf of Mexico, 9 spills – Florida’s Atlantic coast (1992-2001)
    Loggerheads again vulnerable
    Other forms of pollution: Marine Debris (Plastic), Rubbish on beaches, abandoned fishing gear
    US remains highest marine polluter (2,742,993 kilograms per day of organic pollutants)
    Land Development
    20% of historic nests lost entirely
    50% of remaining nests – extremely low populations
  • Major points of Discontentment
    They are predominantly developing countries
    The TED’s were very expensive , cost around 20-30 USD.
    These countries were given only 4 months to adapt.
    TED’s : not the only way
    Insistence on US certification, without any aid
  • Actual Reasons
    Majority of Caribbean trawlers were owned by US firms.
    Tropical shrimps (a new product) were capturing market share from Temperate shrimps.
    Export markets -North America, the EU and Japan
    Switch airliner purchases from Airbus to Boeing.
  • World Shrimp Production
    • 2.4 million MT in 1987 to 6.6 million MT in 2006.
    • China is the main shrimp producing country with 2.7 million MT
    • Other major shrimp producing countries - Indonesia, India and Thailand
  • Why CHINA is not banned?
    U.S -> china uses “aquaculture approach” which harms the turtle least.
    China have been using antibiotics on their shrimp but till date only one shipment of Chinese shrimp has been stopped.
    Major export is White shrimps.
  • Ruling & Subsequent Events
    The import ban on shrimps applied by the US on the basis of Section 609 was not consistent with Article XI:1 of GATT 1994, and can’t be justified under Article XX of GATT 1994.
    On 6 November 1998, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) acknowledged US efforts to preserve the sea turtles but requested it to bring its measures consistent with the Articles of GATT.
  • On 21 January 1999, the US and the other parties to the dispute agreed to a 13-month reasonable period of time to comply with the recommendations of the DSB.
  • Recent Developments
    Thai shrimp companies were accused of using child and forced labor in their production sector.
    Thailand remains the top supplier of shrimp to the US market, with 73,367 tones or 31% of total imported volumes, followed by Indonesia, Ecuador, México, Vietnam and China
  • In 2005, the US imposed duties that can be more than 100 per cent on shrimp imports.(Brazil, China, India, Thailand and Vietnam).
    US International Trade Commission (USITC) to consider impact of rollback on local industry.
  • Jagdish Bhagwati’s View
    Jurists were reflecting the political pressures of the rich-country environmental NGOs, increasing the dissatisfaction of developing nations , further widening the North-South divide.
  • Conclusion
    It was basically a Trade war fought under the environment versus free trade banner.
    Developing nations wanted environment protection, multilateral dialogue on environment in WTO
    Game of bargaining power
    Trade-offs and protectionism.
  • Conclusion(Contd..)
    The North-South divide is widening since Seattle Rounds.
    No agreement on environmental issues, WTO losing relevance.
  • Thank You