Talk:Country of origin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Business and economics Portal
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
B rated as b-Class on the assessment scale
Mid rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale


[edit] Rules of origin?

I was redirected from Rules of Origin to Country of Origin. Rules of Origin should have its own article/heading as the rules determining the manufacturing process needed for a products to benefit from the preferences under an FTA are called, surprise surprise, Rules of Origin.

Also rules of origin and rules on labelling (made in...) does not necessarily have to be the same. The example using EU or ECC is furthermore not very good, as the EU has no labelling rules in the sense that you don't have to label your products with country of origin. Exception being meat, but these rules differ very much from the rules of origin.

The paragraph on movies is also totally unrelated to Rules of Origin.Blimp80 03:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

What are "Rules of origin" and what makes it a concept exclusively related to FTAs? Seems like it could be covereed in this article, and that the term "Rules of origin" would also apply to the laws about Country of origin marking? Is this in all free trade agreements, a particular free trade agreement, or what?
Article redirects don't necessarily reflect a direct synonym for what was redirected, merely that the content is covered in another article. Seems to me a separate article "Rules of origin" would lead to a content fork, but perhaps it really is a distinct concept and widely-used term? Fourdee 17:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

There are two types of Rules of Origin: Preferential Rules of Origin and Non-preferential rules of origin. Preferential Rules of Origin are exclusively for free trade arrangements or any other preferential tariff concession arrangement.

Non-preferential rules of origin (NPRO) may be used for many things; anti-dumping, safeguard measures, quota systems, statistics and origin marking (made in...). Please note the MAY as there can be exceptions. One of the bigger exception is for instance the EU which does not have a mandatory country of origin labelling legislation (some goods have, for instance meat, but these rules are even more special). Come to think of it, I wrote this before, see above. A paradox with NPRO is that the exporting country can say that a particular good has one origin while the importing country can say that the very same product has a different origin.Blimp80 12:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

One could also add in favour of a separation and the creation of a separate "rules of origin" that since the WTO-negotiations have more or less broken down, FTA will become more and more important meaning that RoO will become more important and a more often use phrase. Blimp80 07:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Well it would definitely be important to have a disambiguation template at the top of each article pointing to the other. I still tend to think that a single article should cover all variations on the concept but don't feel strongly about it as long as each article clearly indicates the other. -- fourdee ᛇᚹᛟ 05:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Is it you that made the redirection? Please do not feel this as a complaint but it is more that finally I have decided to write a rules of origin article, but being a beginner when it comes to wikipedia and don't know how to use "rules of origin" since it is already used, in the redirection. Perhaps you could remove the redirection so I can use the article name. I hope my explanation makes sense. I would appreciate your view.Blimp80 15:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I think this article and the redirect were already here when I became interested in them. It doesn't bother me to split the discussion up as long as the articles reference each other. If it doesn't already, "{{see also|Article}}" should probably appear at the top of each article. "{{otheruses4|Topic of this article|Topic of other article|other article}}" is probably best. -- fourdee ᛇᚹᛟ 22:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Removed redirect from "Rules of Origin. Blimp80 12:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I looked at the article. I do feel this is a subcategory of "Country of origin" since it just touches on the same topics. This article is about how the country of origin is determined for importation and labeling purposes and the "rules of origin" article appears to be the same. I've linked it somewhat to this article and to the "last substantial transformation" article but I get the feeling the topics discussed in "rules of origin" should just be a subsection of this article. I don't feel strongly about it any particular way though. Definitely like to see all the articles well-linked to each other to avoid any content forks. -- fourdee ᛇᚹᛟ 22:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Ok added more links to and from the article. I think it does work out as a separate article. It's always important to make sure the links go back and forth and the relevant categories are included. Thanks for your efforts. -- fourdee ᛇᚹᛟ 22:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok now we have:

and they link to each other. I am still concerned that these topics are overlapping and that at least the titles may not properly distinguish them. If the country of origin article is about the topic in general and the other two are about the EU, maybe their titles should include a "(EU)" or they should just be rolled into this article or a "Country of origin in the EU" article or something. It's important not to have content forks or confusing article titles. At any rate, I think they all link well to each other at this point and have appropriate "see also" and "otheruses" links and categories so any overlap is not a serious problem. -- fourdee ᛇᚹᛟ 23:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

well, to give you an example of why country of origin and rules of origin is not necessarily the same thing we take preferential rules of origin. In theory, in preferential rules of origin you do not determine the country of origin but merely whether or not the product fulfils the rules of origin leading to a preference when importing the product. If the product does not fulfil the rules of origin within a preferential trade arrangement the product has no preferential origin which could mean in layman terms that there is no country of origin.

Preferential rules of origin is not a subcategory of "country of origin" but rather of "FTA". As for non-pref RoO, I am a bit more uncertain. You could say that it should be a subcategory under a compilation of WTO-agreements since there is a WTO-agreement on non-pref RoO, not in anyway fully covers the non-pref RoO. There is actually also a paragraph on preferential RoO, but it means very little in reality.

Now, why I refer so much to preferential RoO is because these are more important than non-pref RoO. The article on RoO is not at all finished and in the end there will be more text on pref RoO.

Why we have somewhat different opinions, which is not at all a bad thing, might (and I say might) be because the focus on labelling is actually not very strong within non-pref RoO. Many countries do not have country of origin (made in..) labelling legislation, even though I think the US is pretty strict on this. Therefore there might be no reference to RoO or rather non-pref RoO, even though it might be use as a supporting argument. Thank you for caring. (no irony i mean it) I do have an opinion on additions on "Rules of Origin, but they are under that article. Blimp80 04:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "made in china" redirect

"made in china" (lowercase) redirects to this page, but there is already a "Made in China" page. How should this be fixed? Cgkm 19:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fixed.Catwhoorg 19:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! =) Cgkm 20:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) -- food

I'm not an expert in the subject but do believe that this topic warrants discussion of the Country of Origin labels that will become law in the US on September 30, 2008. The USDA page is here http://www.ams.usda.gov/cool/.

AlannaKellogg (talk) 15:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)