The Regulatory Framework for Nanomaterials at a Global Level: SAICM and WTO Insights

The regulation of nanomaterials is being discussed at various levels. This article offers a historical description of governmental activities concerning the safety of nanomaterials at the United Nations (UN) level since 2006, with a focus on the UN Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). The outcomes of the SAICM process were a nanospecific resolution and the addition of new activities on nanotechnologies and manufactured nanomaterials to the SAICM’s Global Plan of Action. The article discusses the implications of these decisions for multilateral environmental agreements. In addition, it studies the consequences of the regulation of nanotechnologies activities on trade governance, in particular the relationship between the SAICM to the legally binding World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements (notably the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade). The article concludes that the SAICM decisions on manufactured nanomaterials are compatible with WTO law.

An International Regulatory Framework for National Employment Policies

Employment-related policies are sensitive by any standard, and they remain basically national despite international labour standards (ILS) being even older than the United Nations. Globalization is changing this situation where countries may have to choose between ‘more’ or ‘better’ jobs. The multilateral framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) can only have an indirect impact. But Regional Trade Agreements (RTA) and International Investment Agreements (IIA) are emerging as a new way of gradually enhancing the impact of certain labour standards. In addition, unilateral measures both by governments and importers driven by social and environmental consumer preferences and pressure groups increasingly shape the international regulatory framework for national employment policies. Even small, locally operating enterprises risk marginalization and market exclusion by ignoring these developments. The long-term influence of this new ‘network approach’ on employment-related policies, including job location, gender issues, social coherence and migration remains to be seen. Nonetheless, the still flimsy evidence gathered here seems to indicate that this new, international framework might increase sustainable employment where and when supporting measures, including through unilateral preferences and even sanctions, form a ‘cocktail’ which export-oriented industries and their suppliers will find palatable.