Is it rational and consistent? the WTO’s surprising role in shaping domestic public policy

What makes regulation rational? And why is rationality important to an international tribunal? In the World Trade Organization (WTO) context, these questions have had significant implications for the public policy of its Member countries. The WTO Appellate Body’s emerging emphasis on means–ends rationality testing is based on the questionable premise that consistent regulation is non-discriminatory. It has led regulators, such as the EU, to defend—and probably even construct—complex regulation in a way that emphasizes conformity to one overarching policy objective. More surprisingly, the Appellate Body has re-cast itself as public policy watchdog, pointing out when governments do not appear to be committed to their cause. In response, governments have strengthened disputed regulation, rather than making it less trade-restrictive. This retreat to rationality can be seen as a result of a difficult challenge facing the Appellate Body: how to review national regulation without passing judgment on it. More specifically, the rationality test pays the price of the Appellate Body’s retreat from proportionality.