The Australian government is undertaking public consultations over possible improvements to the 2010 Australian Consumer Law (ACL) regime, including again the idea of adding a European-style general safety provision (GSP). To bolster the case for such reform, Part 2 of this paper analyses 2017–2019 data trends from the OECD Global Recalls Portal for Australia compared with several comparable economies, especially in the Asia-Pacific region where Australia now has most of its trade and investment links. The analysis finds a persistently high per capita recall rate for Australia, compared with several jurisdictions including Korea, Japan, and especially the USA. However, the analysis identifies various legal and other factors across the jurisdictions that impact on interpreting such data. Part 3 therefore begins by highlighting some more specific patterns uncovered from an ongoing joint research project comparing child product safety trends particularly in Australia and the USA. It highlights various concerns regarding recalls in Australia, as well as weaknesses in Australia’s ACL regime (in addition to the lack of a GSP), in coordinating with sector-specific regulation, and in private law mechanisms that could more indirectly promote consumer product safety. Some estimated economic costs from current levels of reported injuries, as well as of many recalls, further reinforce the case for adding a GSP. Part 4 concludes that this improvement to the ACL could be combined with some of the other reform options outlined by the Australian government’s Consultation Regulatory Impact Statement, as well as the introduction of a novel “product safety substantiation order” power. The conclusions and analysis should be helpful for other jurisdictions considering product safety law reforms in an increasingly globalized and digital economy, and draw already on comparisons with regulatory regimes and issues particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.

中文翻译：

---

提高消费品安全体系的有效性：亚太背景下的澳大利亚法律改革

澳大利亚政府正在就 2010 年澳大利亚消费者法 (ACL) 制度的可能改进进行公众咨询，包括再次增加欧洲式一般安全条款 (GSP) 的想法。为了支持这种改革，本文的第 2 部分分析了 OECD 全球召回门户网站的澳大利亚 2017-2019 年数据趋势与几个可比经济体的比较，特别是在亚太地区，澳大利亚现在拥有大部分贸易和投资左边。分析发现，与韩国、日本，尤其是美国等多个司法管辖区相比，澳大利亚的人均召回率一直居高不下。但是，分析确定了影响解释此类数据的司法管辖区的各种法律和其他因素。因此，第 3 部分首先强调了从正在进行的联合研究项目中发现的一些更具体的模式，该项目比较了澳大利亚和美国的儿童产品安全趋势。它强调了对澳大利亚召回的各种担忧，以及澳大利亚 ACL 制度（除了缺乏普惠制）、与特定行业监管协调以及可以更间接地促进消费品安全的私法机制方面的弱点。目前报告的伤害水平以及许多召回的一些估计经济成本进一步加强了增加普惠制的理由。第 4 部分得出的结论是，对 ACL 的这种改进可以与澳大利亚政府的咨询监管影响声明中概述的其他一些改革方案相结合，以及引入新的“产品安全证明令”权力。结论和分析应有助于其他司法管辖区在日益全球化和数字经济中考虑产品安全法改革，并借鉴与监管制度和问题的比较，特别是在亚太地区。