 A recent WTO Secretariat report (see box) argues that
international economic integration and growth reinforce the need for sound environmental
policies at the national and international levels. International cooperation is
particularly important in addressing transboundary and global environmental challenges
beyond the control of any individual nations. This would be true even if nations did not
trade with one another.
Important
parameters back to top
The Committee on Trade
and Environment (CTE) has brought environmental and sustainable development issues into
the mainstream of the WTO’s work. There are several important parameters which have
guided the CTE’s work.
- The first parameter is
that WTO competency for policy coordination in this area is limited to trade and those
trade-related aspects of environmental policies which may result in significant trade
effects for its Members. In other words, it is not intended that the WTO should become an
environmental agency. Nor should it get involved in reviewing national environmental
priorities, setting environmental standards or developing global policies on the
environment. That will continue to be the task of national governments and of other
intergovernmental organizations better suited to the task.
- The second parameter is
that increased national coordination as well as multilateral cooperation is necessary to
address environmental concerns.
- The third parameter is
that secure market access opportunities are essential to help developing countries work
towards sustainable development.
The contribution which
the WTO could make to environmental protection was recognized at the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED — the Earth Summit) in 1992, which
stated that an open, equitable and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system has a
key contribution to make to national and international efforts to better protect and
conserve environmental resources and promote sustainable development. Among the most
important recommendations of the UNCED to the GATT at the time was to implement the
results of the Uruguay Round.
In its first report in
1996, the CTE recognized that trade and environment are both important areas of
policy-making and that they should be mutually supportive in order to promote sustainable
development. The report noted that the multilateral trading system has the capacity to
further integrate environmental considerations and enhance its contribution to the
promotion of sustainable development without undermining its open, equitable and
non-discriminatory character.
To raise awareness of
the linkages between trade, environment and sustainable development and to enhance the
dialogue between policy makers from Ministries of both trade and environment in WTO Member
Governments, the WTO Secretariat has organized a series of regional seminars on trade and
environment for government officials from developing and least-developed countries and
countries with economies in transition.
At its most recent
meeting in October 1999, the CTE agreed to hold three meetings in 2000 and to continue to
deepen the analysis of all items on the work programme based on the thematic clusters of
market access and the linkages between the multilateral environment and trade agendas with
the objective of fulfilling the mandate of the CTE.
Some of the main
points of discussion of the CTE’s work programme include the following:
Trade measures applied pursuant to MEAs back to top
Throughout the
discussions on this issue in the WTO, it has become clear that the preferred approach for
governments to take in tackling transboundary or global environmental problems is through
cooperative, multilateral action under an MEA. While some MEAs contain trade provisions,
trade restrictions are not the only nor necessarily the most effective policy instrument
to use in MEAs. In certain cases they can play an important role. It has also been stated
that the WTO already provides broad and valuable scope for trade measures to be applied
pursuant to MEAs in a WTO-consistent manner.
As in the past few
years, in June 1999 the CTE held an Information Session with Secretariats of MEAs relevant
to the work of the CTE to discuss the trade-related developments in these agreements. At
the June Session, presentations and papers were provided by the Convention on the
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; the Montreal Protocol
on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change; the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests; and the International Tropical
Timber Organization. This meeting illustrated how trade-related measures function in MEAs
and helped to deepen the understanding of the relationship between MEAs and the
multilateral trading system.
Dispute settlement back to top
A related item
concerns the appropriate forum for the settlement of potential disputes that may arise
over the use of trade measures pursuant to MEAs. Should such disputes be addressed in the
WTO or to the dispute settlement procedures that exist in the MEAs themselves? There is
general agreement that in the event a dispute arises between WTO Members who are also
signatories to an MEA, they should try first to resolve it through the dispute settlement
mechanisms available under that MEA. Were a dispute to arise with a non-party to an MEA,
but with another WTO Member, the WTO would provide the only possible forum for resolving
the dispute.
The CTE agrees that
better policy coordination between trade and environmental policy officials at the
national level can help prevent situations from arising in which the use of trade measures
applied pursuant to the MEAs could become subject to disputes. Furthermore, it is unlikely
that problems would arise in the WTO over trade measures agreed and applied among parties
to an MEA. In the event of a dispute, however, WTO Members are confident that the WTO
dispute settlement provisions would be able to tackle any problems which arise in this
area, including those cases requiring input from environmental experts.
Eco-labelling back to top
Eco-labelling
programmes are important environmental policy instruments. Eco-labelling was discussed
extensively in the GATT, and provided the basis in the CTE for a detailed examination of
related issues. The key requirement from the WTO’s point of view is that
environmental measures that incorporate trade provisions or that affect trade
significantly, should not discriminate between home-produced goods and imports, nor
between imports from or exports to different trading partners. Non-discrimination is the
cornerstone of secure and predictable market access and undistorted competition: consumers
are guaranteed a wider choice and producers better access to the full range of market
opportunities. Subject to that requirement being met, WTO rules place essentially no
constraints on the policy choices available to a country to protect its own environment
against damage either from domestic production or from the consumption of domestically
produced or imported products.
The CTE has
acknowledged that well-designed, eco-labelling programmes can be effective instruments of
environmental policy. It notes that in certain cases such programmes have raised
significant concerns about possible trade effects. An important starting point for
addressing some of these trade effects is to ensure adequate transparency in the
preparation, adoption and application of eco-labelling programmes. Interested parties from
other countries should also be allowed to voice their concerns. Discussion is continuing
on how the use in eco-labelling programmes of criteria based on non-product-related
processes and production methods should be treated under the rules of the WTO Agreement on
Technical Barriers to Trade.
WTO transparency provisions back to top
The WTO transparency
provisions fulfil an important role in ensuring the proper functioning of the multilateral
trading system. They help to prevent unnecessary trade restrictions and distortions and
ensure that WTO Members provide information about changes in their regulations. They can
also provide a valuable first step in ensuring that trade and environment policies are
developed and implemented in a mutually supportive way. Trade-related environmental
measures should not be required to meet more onerous transparency requirements than other
measures that affect trade. The CTE has stated that no modifications to WTO rules are
needed to ensure adequate transparency for trade-related environmental measures. In 1998,
the CTE also established a WTO Environmental Database which can be accessed electronically
by WTO Members. The WTO Secretariat will up-date this database annually by reviewing all
the environment-related notifications. The Environmental Database is seen as an important
step towards increasing the transparency of trade-related environmental measures notified
by WTO Members.
Export of domestically prohibited goods
back to top
During the
mid-1980’s, concerns were raised by a number of developing country GATT Contracting
Parties that they were importing certain hazardous or toxic products without knowing the
full environmental or public health dangers such products could pose. In the late
1980’s, a GATT Working Party examined ways of treating trade in goods which are
severely restricted or banned for sale on the domestic market of an exporting country. A
key consideration was that the importing country should be fully informed about the
products it was receiving and have the right to reject them if it felt such products
caused environmental or public health problems.
Several MEAs have been
negotiated in the last few years to deal with problems of trade in environmentally
hazardous products (e.g. the Basel Convention and London Guidelines). The WTO does not
intend to duplicate work that has already been accomplished elsewhere in the area of
domestically prohibited goods. WTO Members, in the context of the CTE, have agreed to
support the efforts of the specialized inter-governmental environmental organizations that
are helping to resolve such problems. However, they have noted that there may be a
complementary role for the WTO to play in this area.
Trade liberalization and
sustainable development back to top
Further liberalization
of international trade, both in goods and services, has a key role to play in advancing
economic policy objectives in Member countries. In that respect, WTO Members have already
made an important contribution to sustainable development and better environmental
protection world-wide by concluding the Uruguay Round negotiations. This contribution will
steadily increase as the results of the Round move towards full implementation. The UN
Conference on Environment and Development (the “Earth Summit”) also recognized
an open, non-discriminatory trading system to be a prerequisite for effective action to
protect the environment and to generate sustainable development. This is based on the
perspective that countries, particularly developing countries, are dependent on trade as
the main source of continued growth and prosperity.
The CTE is continuing
to tackle this item of its work programme in the context of the built-in agenda for
further trade liberalization initiatives contained in the results of the Uruguay Round
negotiations. The CTE has noted that the removal of trade restrictions and distortions, in
particular high tariffs, tariff escalation, export restrictions, subsidies and non-tariff
barriers, has the potential to yield benefits for both the multilateral trading system and
the environment. Discussions in 1999 included the sectors of agriculture and fisheries,
energy, forestry, non-ferrous metals, textiles and clothing, leather and environmental
services. The discussions highlighted areas where the removal of trade restrictions and
distortions can be beneficial for the environment, trade and development, providing
“win-win-win” opportunities.
Trade in services and TRIPS back to top
The CTE also is to
examine the role of the WTO in relation to the links between environmental measures and
the new trade agreements reached in the Uruguay Round negotiations on services and
intellectual property. Discussion on these two items of the work programme have broken new
ground since there was very little understanding of how the rules of the trading system
might affect or be affected by environmental policies in these areas.
With respect to the
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the environment, the CTE has noted that
its discussions so far have not led to the identification of any measures that Members
feel may be applied for environmental purposes to services trade which are not already
adequately covered by GATS provisions. In the case of intellectual property rights, WTO
Members have acknowledged that the Agreement on Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS) plays an essential role in facilitating access to and the transfer of
environmentally-sound technology and products. However, further work is required in this
area, including clarifying the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention
on Biological Diversity. |
