Final answer:
Standard setting in the context of international trade and societal norms often favors approaches that are science-based, non-discriminatory, and allow for national preferences while ensuring fairness across borders. In education, national standards have sought to replace local approaches but face challenges in their impact and acceptance.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering what can prevail in standard setting, it is important to acknowledge the impact on international trade regulations and corporate strategies. WTO rules allow countries to establish their own standards, maintaining that they should be science-based and non-discriminatory. This means a country like the United States can require all food products or vehicles sold within its borders to meet safety standards set by the government, provided these are scientifically justified. Conversely, applying different safety standards for domestic goods versus imports, or between importing countries without justification, is not permitted.
The societal impact of standard setting extends to areas like education, where national standards have sometimes been preferred over localized approaches to achieve consistency and address inefficiency. An illustration of this is the No Child Left Behind law, which aimed to standardize education across the U.S. but faced opposition and showed limited impact due to various challenges. The trend towards preferring policies set at the national level indicates an affinity for uniformity in society.
Standard setting should be equitable and substantiated, avoiding arbitrary discrimination and addressing problems at their root. Whether in trade agreements or educational reforms, the principle of reasonable pluralism and reflective equilibrium should guide the formation of these standards, ensuring a balance between national interests and fair trade practices.