Developing countries, livelihood and public health

I have blogged about the plain packaging dispute here, here and here. Amongst the many issues arising in the dispute, the one that is linked to the developing country development policy space debate is the impact it has on employment and livelihoods of those in the developing world that are dependent on tobacco production.Cuba's recent entry into the dispute has made this issue come to the forefront again.

Tania Voon and Andrew Mitchell do not agree with the stand that it is in developing countries interest. They have a summary of their arguments here.

The Trade, Investment and Health blog picked this up and has reiterated the position that it is actually not in the interests of the poor of the developing world.

Some observations:

1. How strong or legally tenable is the developing country employment and livelihood stand in a WTO dispute? Is there jurisprudence to support it? Or is it just a ideological argument not supported by specific GATT/TRIPS rules?

2. Who decides what is in the interests of the citizens of a country impacted by such a measure? Is it an objective analysis? Or is national policy will in determining that livelihoods are impacted the best judge? Or is it an international arbiter like a WTO panel?

Just these two questions for now.

Cuba joins the battle

Cuba is the latest entrant to the Tobacco Plain Packaging dispute with reports that it has sought consultations with Australia on the measure trickling in. Cuba had already reserved third party rights in a WTO dispute that was initiated by Ukraine against Australia. I have blogged about this here, here and here. NYT covered this news recently here.

Interesting facts about the Cuban challenge:

1. It is Cuba's first WTO dispute settlement case - either as a complainant or a respondent

2. Cuba, a developing economy, is challenging a developed economy (Australia) on the grounds that it's intellectual property rights have been allegedly infringed - the use of TRIPS by a developing country against a developed economy (The allegation is that it is normally the other way round)

3. With the Dominican Republic and Cuba joining the challenge, it seems to be a Caribbean battle against plain packaging of tobacco.

While on the one side pubic policy imperatives of public health drive the legislative moves of tobacco plain packaging, impact on local employment in developing economies and its impact on trade and jobs is forcing a legal challenge at the international forum. 

Just another example to show that trade measures are not just about trade - it has a far reaching impact on employment and growth.