Are Standards Always Protectionist?

We analyze the effects of a domestic standard that reduces an externality associated with the consumption of the good targeted by the standard, using a model in which foreign and domestic producers compete in the domestic good market. Producers can reduce expected damage associated with the externality by incurring a cost that varies by source of origin. Despite potential protectionism, the standard is useful in correcting the consumption externality in the domestic country. Protectionism occurs when the welfare-maximizing domestic standard is higher than the international standard maximizing welfare inclusive of foreign profits. The standard is actually anti-protectionist when foreign producers are much more efficient at addressing the externality than are domestic producers. Possible exclusion of domestic or foreign producers arises with large standards, which may alter the classification of a standard as protectionist or non-protectionist. The paper provides important implications for the estimation and use of tariff equivalents of nontariff barriers.

The Recent International and Regulatory Decisions about Geographical Indications, 2007

As worldwide consumer demand for high-quality products and for information about these products increases, labels and geographical indications (GIs) can serve to signal quality traits to consumers. However, GI systems among countries are not homogeneous and can be used as trade barriers against competition. Philosophical differences between the European Union and the United States about how GIs should be registered and protected led to the formation of a WTO dispute settlement panel. In this paper we discuss the issues behind the dispute, the World Trade Organization (WTO) panel decision, and the EU response to the panel decision leading to the new Regulation 510/2006. Given the potential for GI labels to supply consumer information, context is provided for the discussion using recent literature on product labeling. Implications are drawn regarding the importance of the panel decision and the EU response relative to GI issues yet to be negotiated under the Doha Round.

Correlation of the IJK Roadmeter to the International Roughness Index, MLR-91-5, 1992

The Iowa Department of Transportation has been determining a present serviceability index (PSI) on the primary highway system since 1968. A CHLOE profilometer has been used as the standard for calibrating the Roadmeters that do the system survey. The current Roadmeter, an IJK Iowa DOT developed unit, is not considered an acceptable Roadmeter for determining the FHWA required International Roughness Index (IRI). Iowa purchased a commercial version of the South Dakota type profile (SD Unit) to obtain IRI. This study was undertaken to correlate the IRI to the IJK Roadmeter and retire the Roadmeter. One hundred forty-seven pavement management sections (IPMS) were tested in June and July 1991 with both units. Correlation coefficients and standard error of estimates were: r' Std. Error PCC pavements 0.81 0.15 Composite pavements 0.71 0.18 ACC pavements 0.77 0.17 The correlation equations developed from this work will allow use of the IRI to predict the IJK Roadmeter response with sufficient accuracy. Trend analysis should also not be affected.

Standard Specifications for Highway and Bridge Construction, 2012

When referenced, the 2012 edition of the Iowa Department of Transportation’s (Iowa DOT) Standard Specifications for Highway and Bridge Construction shall be used for contract work awarded by the Iowa DOT. They may also be incorporated by reference in other contract work on secondary, urban, local systems, or other contract work in which the Iowa DOT has an interest. As modified by the General Supplemental Specifications, these Standard Specifications represent the minimum requirements and may be modified by Supplemental Specifications, Developmental Specifications, and Special Provisions on specific contracts. These Standard Specifications have been written so the Contractor’s responsibilities are indicated by plain language using the Imperative Mood and Active Voice form. Sentences are of the form: Construct isolation joints at all points where driveways meet other walks, curbs, or fixtures in the surface. Ensure finished members are true to detailed dimensions and free from twists, bends, open joints, or other defects resulting from faulty fabrication or defective work. Personnel preparing the JMF shall be Iowa DOT certified in bituminous mix design. The Contracting Authority’s responsibilities are (with some exceptions) indicated by the use of the modal verb “will”. Sentences are of the form: The Engineer will obtain and test density samples for each lot according to Materials I.M. 204. Payment will be the contract unit price for Fabric Reinforcement per square yard (square meter). These standard specifications contain dual units of measure: the United States Standard measure (English units) and the International System of Units (SI or “metric” units). The English units are expressed first then followed by the metric units in parentheses. The measurements expressed in the two systems are not necessarily equal. In some cases the measurements in metric units is a “hard” conversion of the English measurement; i.e. the metric unit has been approximated with a rounded, rationalized metric measurement that is easy to work with and remember. The proposal form will identify whether the work was designed and shall be constructed in English or metric units.