The International Food Safety Complex in Southern Africa: cooperation or competition?

Abstract

The article seeks to contribute to discussions about international institutional complexes, in particular how they emerge and form functional niches. Testing the premise that competition between international institutions guides functional niche selection, the International Food Safety Complex (IFSC) is characterised and examined in light of the experience of Southern Africa. Institutional competition is shown not to be a necessary precondition for functional niche selection; rather, cooperation can also be a starting point. Related to whether competition or cooperation win out are the timing of and absolute demand for the international institutional complex. The final section looks at the impact of the structure and function of the IFSC on building food safety regulation in the Southern African region. A single case study of South Africa offers some insight into the opportunities and challenges that exist in the African region.

Keywords:

• interlocking institutions
• international institutions
• food safety
• South Africa
• Codex
• sanitary and phytosanitary
• South African Development Community
• international trade

Notes

1. Unnevehr L & N Hirschhorn ‘Food safety issues in the developing world’, World Bank Technical Paper No. 469. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2000, p. 7.

2. Faude B & T Gehring ‘Institutional ecology and the evolution of broader structures of international governance. The trade and environment’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners, New Orleans Hilton Riverside Hotel, The Loews New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, 17 February 2010, < http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p416842_index.html>.

3. Faude B & T Gehring ‘Institutional ecology and the evolution of broader structures of international governance. The trade and environment’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners, New Orleans Hilton Riverside Hotel, The Loews New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, 17 February 2010, < http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p416842_index.html>., p. 5.

4. Hannan MT (forthcoming) & J Freeman ‘The population ecology of organizations’, American Journal of Sociology, 82, 5, 1977, p. 941.

5. Brosig M (forthcoming) ‘The interplay of international institutions in Kosovo between convergence, confusion and niche capabilities’, European Security.

6. Brosig M ‘Governance between international institutions: Analysing interaction modes between the EU, the Council of Europe and the OSCE’, in Galbreath D & C Gebhardt (eds), Cooperation or Conflict? Problematizing Overlap in Europe. London: Ashgate, 2010, pp. 41–45. Brosig M (forthcoming) ‘The African Union a Partner for the EU in Security?’ in S Biscop & R Whitman (eds) The Routledge Handbook on European Security. Faude B & T Gehring ‘Institutional ecology and the evolution of broader structures of international governance. The trade and environment’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners, New Orleans Hilton Riverside Hotel, The Loews New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, 17 February 2010, < http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p416842_index.html>. Stokke OS ‘The interplay of international regimes: Putting effectiveness theory to work’, FNI Report, 14/2001.

7. Brosig M ‘Overlap and interplay between international organisations: Theories and approaches. South African Journal for International Affairs, 18, 2, 2011.

8. Brosig M ‘Governance between international institutions: Analysing interaction modes between the EU, the Council of Europe and the OSCE’, in Galbreath D & C Gebhardt (eds), Cooperation or Conflict? Problematizing Overlap in Europe. London: Ashgate, 2010, pp. 41–45.

9. Shanks C et al., ‘Inertia and change in the constellation of international governmental organizations’, International Organization, 50, 4, pp. 593–627.

10. Raustiala K & D Victor ‘The regime complex for plant genetic resources’, International Organisation, 58, Spring 2004, p. 278.

11. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>.

12. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>. Article 2.2, 3.3, 5.1 & 5.6.

13. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>., Article 3.1.

14. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>., Article 3.2.

15. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>., Article 3.3.

16. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>., Article 7 and Annex B.

17. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 2.3 & 5.5, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>., Article 12.4.

18. WHO (World Health Organisation), ‘Joint FAO/WHO food standards programme (Codex Alimentarius)’, <http://www.who.int/foodsafety/codex/en/>.

19. WHO (World Health Organisation), ‘Joint FAO/WHO food standards programme (Codex Alimentarius)’, <http://www.who.int/foodsafety/codex/en/>., p. 1.

20. SADC (Southern African Development Community), ‘SADC profile’, <http://www.sadc.int/index/browse/page/52>.

21. SADC (Southern African Development Community), ‘Declaration and treaty of SADC’, <http://www.sadc.int/index/browse/page/119>.

22. Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), Regional and SPS Frameworks and strategies in Africa, July 2010, p. 15, <http://www.standardsfacility.org/Files/Publications/STDF_Regional_SPS_Stategies_in_Africa.pdf>.

23. Personal interview with SADC official, 21 October 2010.

24. Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), Regional and SPS Frameworks and strategies in Africa, July 2010, <http://www.standardsfacility.org/Files/Publications/STDF_Regional_SPS_Stategies_in_Africa.pdf>.

25. Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF), Regional and SPS Frameworks and strategies in Africa, July 2010, <http://www.standardsfacility.org/Files/Publications/STDF_Regional_SPS_Stategies_in_Africa.pdf>., p. 16.

26. Food and Agriculture Organization, ‘Understanding the Codex’ FAO Corporate Document Repository, accessed 6 April 2011 <www.fao.org/docrep>.

27. Food and Agriculture Organization, ‘Understanding the Codex’ FAO Corporate Document Repository, accessed 6 April 2011 <www.fao.org/docrep>.

28. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Text of the agreement’, Article 3.1 & 3.2, <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm>.

29. Deveraux C, RZ Lawrence & M Watkins Case Studies in US Trade Negotiation, 2 vols. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 2006, p. 58.

30. Standards in Trade Development Facility, ‘About us’, accessed 4 April 2011, <www.standardsfacility.org>

31. Faude B & T Gehring ‘Institutional ecology and the evolution of broader structures of international governance. The trade and environment’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners, New Orleans Hilton Riverside Hotel, The Loews New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, 17 February 2010, p. 6, < http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p416842_index.html>.

32. Faude B & T Gehring ‘Institutional ecology and the evolution of broader structures of international governance. The trade and environment’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Theory vs. Policy? Connecting Scholars and Practitioners, New Orleans Hilton Riverside Hotel, The Loews New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, 17 February 2010, p. 6, < http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p416842_index.html>., p. 6.

33. WHO (World Health Organisation), ‘Food safety’, <http://www.who.int/foodsafety/codex/trustfund/en/>. For example, Codex recently held a session in Bali, Indonesia, for developing countries to assist in preparing them for putting forward national positions on Codex proposals at full Codex meetings.

34. Rosendal GK ‘Impacts of overlapping international regimes: The case of biodiversity’, Global Governance, 7, 1, 2001, pp. 95–117.

35. Syndes AK ‘Overlapping regimes: The SPS Agreement and the Cartagena Protocol’, in Young O et al. (eds), Institutional Interplay: Biodiversity and Trade. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, pp. 71–93.

36. Principled similarity means that there is a resemblance or symmetry between the principles underpinning institutions within the IFSC and the structure and legislative underpinnings of the South African food safety system.

37. For more information on non-governmental organisations with an interest in private food standards development please visit <www.globalgap.org>.

38. Private standards are completely voluntary and do not attempt to implement standards coming from the IFSC, rather their own standards that address specific consumer confidence issues in particular markets. For example, labelling when products are made from organic ingredients.

39. South Africa, Department of Health, ‘Directorate: Food Control’, <http://www.doh.gov.za/department/dir_foodcontr.html>.

40. South Africa, Department of Health, ‘Guidelines for the food safety control of imported foodstuffs entering South Africa through land and ports of entry’, Centre for Development Research, CDR Working Paper 02.3, <http://www.doh.gov.za/docs/factsheets/import.html>.

41. Codex (Codex Alimentarius Commission), ‘Recommended international code of practice: General principles of food hygiene’, CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev.4-2003.

42. Codex (Codex Alimentarius Commission), ‘Codex Alimentarius: Veterinary drugs, <http://www.oie.int/RR-Europe/eng/events/FS-SS-Codex-vet_drugs.pdf>.

43. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation), ‘Codex Alimentarius — Food import and export inspection and certification systems…’ <http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/y6396e/Y6396E02.htm#ref2.1> and Codex (Codex Alimentarius Commission), ‘Compendium of methods of analysis identified as suitable to support Codex MRL’, <http://www.codexalimentarius.net/mrls/vetdrugs/vetd_ref/MAS-RVDF_2006_e.pdf>.

44. Codex (Codex Alimentarius Commission), ‘Recommended international code of practice: General principles of food hygiene’, CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev.4-2003 and Trade Metrology Act of 1973 (Act 77 of 1973) and the Trade Marks Act, 1963 (Act 62 of 1963).

45. South Africa, Department of Health, ‘Directorate: Food Control’, <http://www.doh.gov.za/department/dir_foodcontr.html>.

46. Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), ‘33rd Session, International Conference Centre. Geneva, Switzerland 5–9 July’, Alinorm 10/33/ REP, pp. 11–14, 21, accessed 31 January 2011, <http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/archives.jsp?year=10>.

47. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘SPS information management system’, accessed 31 January 2011, <http://spsims.wto.org/web/pages/search/notification/Search.aspx>.

48. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘Notification’, 2 March 2009, G/SPS/N/ZAF/26.

49. WTO (World Trade Organisation), ‘SPS information management system’, accessed 31 January 2011, <http://spsims.wto.org/web/pages/search/notification/Search.aspx>.

50. Mooketsa R ‘Public private partnerships in support of sanitary and phytosanitary capacity: A South African case study’, presentation to the Standards in Trade Development Facility, accessed 31 January 2011, <http://www.standardsfacility.org/Files/PPP/Presentations/16-Mooketsa_Ramasodi.pdf>.

51. For a discussion on informal dispute resolution opportunities in SPS contexts please see: Hornsby DJ ‘WTO effectiveness in resolving transatlantic trade — Environment conflict’, Journal of International Trade Law and Policy, 9, 3, pp. 297–309 and Lang A & S Joanne ‘The hidden world of WTO governance’, European Journal of International Law, 20, 3, 2009, pp. 575–614.

52. STC 161 G/SPS/R/29, paras 38–39. Supported STC 19, 27, 39, 60, 219, <http://spsims.wto.org/web/pages/search/stc/Search.aspx>.

53. STC 3, 32, 39, 53, 87, 135, 144, 172, 244, 248, 255, 263, 265, 266, 271, 281, 283, 285, 286, 287, 293, 294, 298, 303. STC supported 7, 22, 27, 31, 54, 68, 74, 103, 104, 111, 159, 169, 176, 187, 197, 224, 238, 240, 279, <http://spsims.wto.org/web/pages/search/stc/Search.aspx>.

54. Gebrehiwet Y, S Ngqangweni & JF Kirsten ‘Quantifying the trade effect of sanitary and phytosanitary regulations of OECD countries on South African food exports’, Agrekon, 46, 1, 2007, pp. 23–39.

55. Personal interview with DAFF official, 18 October 2010.

56. Personal interview with DAFF official, 18 October 2010.

57. Personal interview with DAFF official, 18 October 2010.

58. Alemanno A Trade in Food: Regulatory and Judicial Approaches in the EC and WTO. Cameron, May 2007.