Status of the shrimp sector in Bangladesh in the context of HACCP and trade issues: a review

Shrimp culture in Bangladesh has emerged as an important aquaculture industry over the last three decades although its culture in greater parts of the farming area is done in traditional ways. In the meantime, the government of Bangladesh has taken necessary measures along with the private sectors to increase production, upgrade processing industries and to promote export performance. Long supply chain in raw material collection, inadequate infrastructure facilities, poor level of cool chain and lack of adequate HACCP-based training on hygiene and sanitation of different groups of people involved in the field level are the main problems of quality loss of raw materials. Shortage of raw materials results in poor capacity utilization of the processing plants. The growth of bagda (P. monodon) hatchery has expanded rapidly over the last few years, remaining mostly concentrated in Cox's Bazar region is enough to meet the target production. However, there is a shortage of pelleted shrimp feed in Bangladesh. A large number of export processors are now producing increasing amounts of value-added products such as individually quick-frozen, peeled and divined, butterfly cut shrimp, as well as cooked products. The export earnings from value added products is about half of the total export value. About 95% of total fish products are exported to European countries, USA and Japan and the remaining to the Southeast Asia and the Middle East. Most of the EU approved shrimp processing industries have been upgraded with laboratory facilities and provided HACCP training to their workers. As of now, HACCP is applied on the processing plants, but to ensure the quality of raw materials and to reduce risks, shrimp farms are also required to adopt HACCP plan. There is increased pressure time to time from importing countries for fish processors to establish effective quality assurance system in processing plants. Fish Inspection and Quality Control (FIQC) of the Department of Fisheries while having moderately equipped laboratories with chemical, bio-chemical and microbiological testing facilities and qualified technical personnel, the creation of facilities for testing of antibiotics is underway. FIQC mainly supervises quality aspects of the processing plants and has little or no control over raw material supply chains from farm to processing plants. Bangladesh export consignments sometimes face rejection due to reported poor quality of the products. Three types of barriers are reported for export of shrimp to EU countries. These are:(1) government participation in trade and restrictive practices (state aid, countervailing duties, state trading enterprises, government monopoly practices), customs and administrative entry procedures (anti-dumping duties, customs valuation, classification, formalities, rules of origin); (2) technical barriers to trade or TBT (technical regulations, standards, testing, certification arrangement); (3) specific limitations (quantitative restrictions, import licensing, embargoes, exchange control, discriminatory sourcing, export restraints, measures to regulate domestic prices, requirements concerning marking, labeling and packaging).

Marine non-natives, issues, engagement and action in France and the UK

The first presentation focused on best practice in marine environments and was delivered by the MBA, in association with PEGASEAS. Information was presented about the significance of joint working across the Channel and a number of different projects including The Shore Thing Project were explained.

Non-Trade Mark Use

Examines the extent to which the approach of the EU and UK courts towards the enforcement of trade mark rights is contrary to the public interest in the sense that it diminishes non-commercial interests and the freedom of expression. Comments on the European Court of Justice ruling in Arsenal Football Club Plc v Reed (C-206/01) on whether the trade mark rights over the name ARSENAL prevented its use on unofficial merchandise as a sign of club affiliation. Assesses the sufficiency of the infringement exceptions provided by Directive 2008/95 (Trade Mark Directive) art.6.

Trade, environment and development: implications for Caribbean countries

Includes bibliography

Transatlantic Conflict and Cooperation Concerning Trade Issues. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 14 No. 13, July 2014

From the Introduction. Transatlantic relations have undergone significant changes within the past twenty-five years. During the Cold War era, the United States and Western Europe were bound together by a perceived common threat from the Soviet Union. Consequently, economic issues commanded less attention than security issues. After the Cold War ended, economic issues were thought to be the glue that would hold the transatlantic relationship together. Much attention was given for several years to fostering economic cooperation through the development of intergovernmental initiatives. After the terrorist incidents of September 11, 2001 in the United States, and the subsequent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, security issues again came to the forefront of the relationship. However, in contrast to the earlier era that was mainly characterized by close cooperation, disagreements between the United States and major countries of Western Europe about how to deal with the terrorist threat created severe strains in the relationship. By 2003, the third year of the George W Bush administration, transatlantic political relations had reached perhaps their lowest point since World War II. They have gradually improved since then, but with a significant setback from Wikileaks revelations, and even more serious strains resulting from the revelations by Edward Snowden concerning United States surveillance activities. Security issues have come to the forefront also in connection with regional unrest in the Middle East, EU nations’ dependence on Russian oil and gas, and Russian intrusions into Ukraine.

United States - Japan trade: issues and problems - report by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Mode of access: Internet.

Global Trade Governance and ASEAN: Studies of Trade-Related Aspects of Labor, Environment and Culture in Southeast Asia

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-08

Trade liberalisation and technical efficiency: Evidence from Bangladesh manufacturing industries

The paper investigates the effects of trade liberalisation on the technical efficiency of the Bangladesh manufacturing sector by estimating a combined stochastic frontier-inefficiency model using panel data for the period 197894 for 25 three-digit level industries. The results show that the overall technical efficiency of the manufacturing sector as well as the technical efficiencies of the majority of the individual industries has increased over time. The findings also clearly suggest that trade liberalisation, proxied by export orientation and capital deepening, has had significant impact on the reduction of the overall technical inefficiency. Similarly, the scale of operation and the proportion of non-production labour in total employment appear as important determinants of technical inefficiency. The evidence also indicates that both export-promoting and import-substituting industries have experienced rises in technical efficiencies over time. Besides, the results are suggestive of neutral technical change, although (at the 5 per cent level of significance) the empirical results indicate that there was no technical change in the manufacturing industries. Finally, the joint test based on the likelihood ratio (LR) test rejects the Cobb-Douglas production technology as description of the database given the specification of the translog production technology.

Measuring exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation using a dosimetric technique : understanding participant compliance issues

Personal ultraviolet dosimeters have been used in epidemiological studies to understand the risks and benefits of individuals' exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR). We investigated the types and determinants of non-compliance associated with a protocol for use of polysulphone UVR dosimeters. In the AusD Study, 1,002 Australian adults (aged 18-75 years) were asked to wear a new dosimeter on their wrist each day for 10 consecutive days to quantify their daily exposure to solar UVR. Of the 10,020 dosimeters distributed, 296 (3%) were not returned or used (Type I non-compliance) and other usage errors were reported for 763 (8%) returned dosimeters (Type II non-compliance). Type I errors were more common in participants with predominantly outdoor occupations. Type II errors were reported more frequently on the first day of measurement; weekend days or rainy days; and among females; younger people; more educated participants or those with outdoor occupations. Half (50%) the participants reported a non-compliance error on at least one day during the 10-day period. However, 92% of participants had at least 7 days of usable data without any apparent non-compliance issues. The factors identified should be considered when designing future UVR dosimetry studies.

Analytical study of implementation issues of NTRU

Nth-Dimensional Truncated Polynomial Ring (NTRU) is a lattice-based public-key cryptosystem that offers encryption and digital signature solutions. It was designed by Silverman, Hoffstein and Pipher. The NTRU cryptosystem was patented by NTRU Cryptosystems Inc. (which was later acquired by Security Innovations) and available as IEEE 1363.1 and X9.98 standards. NTRU is resistant to attacks based on Quantum computing, to which the standard RSA and ECC public-key cryptosystems are vulnerable to. In addition, NTRU has higher performance advantages over these cryptosystems. Considering this importance of NTRU, it is highly recommended to adopt NTRU as part of a cipher suite along with widely used cryptosystems for internet security protocols and applications. In this paper, we present our analytical study on the implementation of NTRU encryption scheme which serves as a guideline for security practitioners who are novice to lattice-based cryptography or even cryptography. In particular, we show some non-trivial issues that should be considered towards a secure and efficient NTRU implementation.

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.