Provide your thoughts on these 3 case questions (1-3 p. 275).

1. What was the role of the panel in settling this dispute under the SPS Agreement? Did it make its own determination and draw its own scientific conclusions about the effect of beef hormones on human health, or did it give total deference to the conclusions of the EU scientists? Here is a website to help with the SPS agreement: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsagr_e.htm 2. What factors were taken into account to deter- mine whether a sanitary measure violates the SPS Agreement? 3. It is an interesting irony in this case that today many scientists, environmentalists, and consumer groups in the United States are calling for a similar domestic ban on beef growth hormones. How do you feel about the use of hormones in beef cattle?

Provide your thoughts on these 3 case questions/problems p. 289. Use the reading material to assist in coming up with the answers to these questions/problems:

1. In the early 1960s, Honda entered the U.S. motorcycle market with the slogan, "You meet the nicest people on a Honda."During the next two decades, the Japanese company not only made motorcycling acceptable and fun but it also introduced motorcycles known for quality, dependability, and easy starting. By 1982, Japanese motorcycles had reached their peak sales in the United States. In the meantime, Harley-Davidson was plagued with quality and image problems. Do you think this should have been considered in the ITC's recommendations or considered by President Reagan? Here is an article to help with # 1: https://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/business/us-raises-tariff-for-motorcycles.html
2. . Assume that a domestic firm is not competitive in price and quality with foreign firms, but that competition by high tariffs protects it. What are the effects of the protection on the firm in the short term? How might it affect the firm's competitiveness in the long term? Here is an article to help with # 2: https://voxdev.org/topic/firms-trade/import-competition-and-quality-domestic-goods 3. President Reagan later rejected recommendations to place quotas on footwear because of estimates it would have cost American consumers $3 billion in increased tariffs, and because there was no indication it would have helped American manufacturers return to competitiveness. How important do you think cost is to a president's decision? Here is an article to help with # 3: https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/01/us/shoe-import-quotas-ended-by-president-price-drops-forecast.html