Safeguard measures are a response to increased imports that cause or threaten to cause serious injury. Therefore, establishing the causal link between increased imports and serious injury is central to safeguards. This seemingly simple task has been the subject matter of a long controversy. In this backdrop, this paper seeks to critically analyse the causation requirement under the Safeguards Agreement and subsequently proposes an alternative theory of causation known as the ‘but for’ test. This theory posits that increased imports will be considered to be a cause of the serious injury only if they are necessary to cause them. It is sought to be argued that the ‘but for’ test is (a) a better understanding of the causation requirement as regards the objective of Safeguards, (b) a more appropriate interpretation of the text and (c) has practical benefits that overcome the limitations of the present model.
Global Trade and Customs Journal