Established within the framework of the World Trade Organization （WTO）, the Trade Policy Review Mechanism （TPRM） reviews periodically the trade policies of all WTO Members. The review includes many aspects of food...Established within the framework of the World Trade Organization （WTO）, the Trade Policy Review Mechanism （TPRM） reviews periodically the trade policies of all WTO Members. The review includes many aspects of food safety regulation. China＇s trade policy is reviewed every two years. This paper analyses in detail the reviews of China＇s trade policy in 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014. It focuses in particular on food safety laws and types of standards, alignment of domestic standards with international standards, the role of different domestic institutions, transparency and notification of food safety measures under the WTO agreements on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures （SPS） and on Technical Barriers to Trade （TBTAgreement）, import and export, and geographical indications （GIs）. It concludes that the WTO TPRM can contribute, within its mandate, to reform of Chinese food safety laws and improvement of food safety in China. it notes that China has already undertaken substantial reforms of its system for regulating food safety. It recommends that China should continue to participate actively in the TPRM, follow its own path with regard to alignment and learn selectively from other WTO Members.展开更多
Both the EU and China are undergoing noticeable changes.On the one hand,the good old days seem to be gone for the EU.Despite positive economic growth rate,the European economic recovery is incomplete and still faces a...Both the EU and China are undergoing noticeable changes.On the one hand,the good old days seem to be gone for the EU.Despite positive economic growth rate,the European economic recovery is incomplete and still faces a lot of challenges such as low investment and youth unemployment.As Brexit needs to be concluded by the end of this year in order to give time for the European Parliament to ratify it,the negotiations are ongoing with very tight agenda.Nobody denies that Brexit serves as a heavy blow to the EU,which gives rise to Euroscepticism and populism.The refugee/migration issue is not solved yet either– the fact that the Czech Republic,Hungary and Poland stubbornly rejected refugee quotas brought the EU’s refugee policy into a deadlock.Furthermore,both Bulgaria and Romania challenged the EU’s rule of law and European democratic norms that gave big headache to Brussels.If these problems won’t be properly handled before the end of this year,faith in the EU would be seriously questioned,which may affect negatively the general European election scheduled in 2019.展开更多
The article focuses on the difference between strategic rhetoric and philosophical conversation. It first tries to distinguish between sophistical manipulation and valid strategic argumentation. In order to do that, t...The article focuses on the difference between strategic rhetoric and philosophical conversation. It first tries to distinguish between sophistical manipulation and valid strategic argumentation. In order to do that, the author tries to give a new meaning to the old Aristotelian tripartition between logos, ethos, and pathos. Then, he uses Chaim Perelman＇s theory of argumentation to show that the standard of rationality in practical reasoning is a specific one. After having clarified the very concept of strategic argumentation, the author distinguishes it from the notion of philosophical conversation. He tries to show that if the latter is completely replaced by the former, the danger exists that victimization and morals ＂a la carte＂ will generate a defeat of critical thought.展开更多
基金Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, ChinaPeking University School of Transnational Law, China
文摘Established within the framework of the World Trade Organization （WTO）, the Trade Policy Review Mechanism （TPRM） reviews periodically the trade policies of all WTO Members. The review includes many aspects of food safety regulation. China＇s trade policy is reviewed every two years. This paper analyses in detail the reviews of China＇s trade policy in 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014. It focuses in particular on food safety laws and types of standards, alignment of domestic standards with international standards, the role of different domestic institutions, transparency and notification of food safety measures under the WTO agreements on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures （SPS） and on Technical Barriers to Trade （TBTAgreement）, import and export, and geographical indications （GIs）. It concludes that the WTO TPRM can contribute, within its mandate, to reform of Chinese food safety laws and improvement of food safety in China. it notes that China has already undertaken substantial reforms of its system for regulating food safety. It recommends that China should continue to participate actively in the TPRM, follow its own path with regard to alignment and learn selectively from other WTO Members.
文摘Both the EU and China are undergoing noticeable changes.On the one hand,the good old days seem to be gone for the EU.Despite positive economic growth rate,the European economic recovery is incomplete and still faces a lot of challenges such as low investment and youth unemployment.As Brexit needs to be concluded by the end of this year in order to give time for the European Parliament to ratify it,the negotiations are ongoing with very tight agenda.Nobody denies that Brexit serves as a heavy blow to the EU,which gives rise to Euroscepticism and populism.The refugee/migration issue is not solved yet either– the fact that the Czech Republic,Hungary and Poland stubbornly rejected refugee quotas brought the EU’s refugee policy into a deadlock.Furthermore,both Bulgaria and Romania challenged the EU’s rule of law and European democratic norms that gave big headache to Brussels.If these problems won’t be properly handled before the end of this year,faith in the EU would be seriously questioned,which may affect negatively the general European election scheduled in 2019.
文摘The article focuses on the difference between strategic rhetoric and philosophical conversation. It first tries to distinguish between sophistical manipulation and valid strategic argumentation. In order to do that, the author tries to give a new meaning to the old Aristotelian tripartition between logos, ethos, and pathos. Then, he uses Chaim Perelman＇s theory of argumentation to show that the standard of rationality in practical reasoning is a specific one. After having clarified the very concept of strategic argumentation, the author distinguishes it from the notion of philosophical conversation. He tries to show that if the latter is completely replaced by the former, the danger exists that victimization and morals ＂a la carte＂ will generate a defeat of critical thought.
