8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
1/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
2/101
of reference to NGOs as well as to industrial lobby groups. The debate initially was quite
contentious and unproductive as both parties differed greatly in their trust of market
forces and typically value the environment differently.3Free traders feared that talk about
environmental protection will be used as an excuse by some economic sectors to gain
protection for themselves against competition from abroad. Environmentalists feared that
free trade will be used as an excuse to give inadequate weight to environmental goals and
excessive weight to maximization of market-measured GDP.
The environmental implications of international trade are becoming an important part of
multilateral and domestic policy agendas. This is particularly the case for trade relations
between developing and developed countries. To what extent developing countries
should devote their resources to lowering domestic environmental costs for their own
welfare and that of the world as whole has frequently been debated. The debate stems
from the widely held view that a tradeoff between economic growth and environmental
quality exists. Many policymakers in developing countries argue that they have the right
to pursue the same material aspirations by the same means as did the industrialized world
during it developmental stages and are thus willing to spend smaller percentages of their
productive resources for pollution abatement than developed countries. It is increasingly
recognized that the import of goods and services entails an implicit transfer of
environmental effects to the exporting country.
The relationship between trade and environment is a complex and highly debated issue.
Addressing this relationship is fundamental in order to achieve sustainable development.
As a result of increasing global economic inter-dependence and further trade
liberalisation as well as growing pressure on the environment and the use of natural
resources, there is an ever growing inter-face between trade and environment. It is widely
recognised that trade and environment can be mutually supportive, but, differences
remain on effective implementation. In fact, trade liberalisation and trade policy have
positive and negative impacts on the environment. However, a number of conditions
should be met to ensure that the net gains deriving from trade liberalisation will support
and reinforce the protection of the environment.
3 Copeland and Taylor, 2004.
2
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
3/101
The trade and environment debate is complex and varied, and it involves some of the
most fundamental WTO principles and rules, such as the concept of non-discrimination
and the definition of "like products". It is a horizontal issue that cuts across many
disciplines in WTO. For example, Multilateral Environmental Agreements have
consequences for trade which may come into conflict with the general aim of the WTO to
reduce trade barriers.
The WTO has no specific agreement dealing with the environment. However, the WTO
agreements confirm governments right to protect the environment, provided certain
conditions are met, and a number of them include provisions dealing with environmental
concerns.
3
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
4/101
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Aims and objectives
The project aims at studying the issues associated with the trade and the environment
debate. This paper begins with the genesis of the issue of trade and the environment and
examines the inter-relation between trade, environment and the WTO. The Paper further
tries to examine the relationship between certain Multilateral Environmental Agreements
(MEAs) and the WTO Agreements. The paper analyzes how environmental provisions
have permeated into the multilateral trading system, through the incorporation of
environmental provisions under new WTO agreements and the concern of the developing
countries with regard to the MEAs.
The Project covers the basic conceptual issues, as well as the genesis of trade and
environment as it has been dealt with in the WTO. The ultimate objective is to understand
the justification for policy linkages between trade and the environment and the rationale
for special trade rules to reflect environmental concerns.
Method of writing
The researcher has endeavored to use a combination of descriptive and analytical styles
of writing throughout this project. More emphasis has been placed on the analytical style
of writing.
Sources of Data
The main sources have been textbooks, articles and web-search.
4
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
5/101
EMERGING ENVIRONMENT DEBATE IN GATT/ WTO
Trade and environment, as an issue, is by no means new. The link between trade and
environmental protection, both the impact of environmental policies on trade, and the
impact of trade on the environment, was recognized as early as 1970.
Growing international concern about the impact of economic growth on social
development and the environment led to a call for an international conference on how to
manage the human environment, and the 1972 Stockholm Conference was the response.
The 1971 GATT study
In 1972, the UN held a Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm. During the
preparations in 1971, the Secretariat of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) prepared a study entitled, "Industrial Pollution Control and International Trade".
The study focused on the implications of environmental protection policies on
international trade. It reflected the concern of trade officials at the time that such policies
could become obstacles to trade as well as could constitute a new form of protectionism
i.e. "green protectionism".
In the discussions that followed, a number of GATT members suggested that a
mechanism be created in GATT for the implications to be examined more thoroughly.
EMIT - GATT Group on Environmental Measures and International Trade
In November 1971, the GATT Council of Representatives agreed to set up a Group on
Environmental Measures and International Trade (EMIT), which would be open to all
GATT members (i.e. GATT signatories). However, the decision also said group would
only convene at the request of GATT members. Therefore, it was not until 1991 when the
members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) asked for the EMIT Group to
be convened. (EFTA, at the time included Austria, Finland, Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.)
Developments: 19711991
5
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
6/101
Between 1971 and 1991, environmental policies began to have an increasing impact on
trade, and with increasing trade flows, the effects of trade on the environment had also
become more widespread. This led to a number of discussions:
During the Tokyo Round of trade negotiations (19731979), participants took up
the question of the degree to which environmental measures (in the form of
technical regulations and standards) could form obstacles to trade. The Tokyo
Round Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), also known as the
"Standards Code", was negotiated. Amongst other things, it called for non-
discrimination in the preparation, adoption and application of technical
regulations and standards, and for them to be transparent.
During the Uruguay Round (19861994), trade-related environmental issues were
once again taken up. Modifications were made to the TBT Agreement, and certain
environmental issues were addressed in the General Agreement on Trade in
Services, the Agreements on Agriculture, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
(SPS), Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).
In 1982, a number of developing countries expressed concern that products
prohibited in developed countries on the grounds of environmental hazards, health
or safety reasons, continued to be exported to them. With limited information on
these products, they were unable to make informed decisions regarding their
import.
At the 1982 GATT ministerial meeting, members decided to examine the
measures needed to bring under control the export of products prohibited
domestically (on the grounds of harm to human, animal, plant life or health, or theenvironment). This led to the creation, in 1989, of a Working Group on the Export
of Domestically Prohibited Goods and Other Hazardous Substances.
In 1991, a dispute between Mexico and United States put the spotlight on the
linkages between environmental protection policies and trade. The case concerned
6
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#tbt2http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#gats14http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#gats14http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#agannex2http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#spsannexahttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#spsannexahttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htmhttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#trips27http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#trips27http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#trips27http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#gats14http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#gats14http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#agannex2http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#spsannexahttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#spsannexahttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htmhttp://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#trips27http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#trips27http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/issu4_e.htm#tbt28/8/2019 WTO and Environment
7/101
a US embargo on tuna imported from Mexico, caught using "purse seine" nets
which caused the incidental killing of dolphins. Mexico appealed to GATT on the
grounds that the embargo was inconsistent with the rules of international trade.
The panel ruled in favour of Mexico based on a number of different arguments.
Although the report of the panel was not adopted, its ruling was heavily criticised
by environmental groups who felt that trade rules were an obstacle to
environmental protection.
During this period, important developments were also taking place in
environmental forums. The discussion on the relationship between economic
growth, social development and environment that began at the Stockholm
Conference continued throughout the 1970s and 80s.
In 1987, for example, the World Commission on Environment and Development
produced a report entitled Our Common Future (also known as the Brundtland
Report), in which the term "sustainable development" was coined. The report
identified poverty as one of the most important causes of environmental
degradation, and argued that greater economic growth, fuelled in part by
increased international trade, could generate the necessary resources to combat
what had become known as the "pollution of poverty".
As a result of these developments, the EMIT groups proposal met with a positive
response. Despite some countries initial reluctance to have environmental issues
discussed in GATT, they agreed to have a structured debate on the subject.
In accordance with its mandate of examining the possible effects of environmental
protection policies on the operation of the General Agreement, the EMIT group
focused on the effects of environmental measures (such as eco-labelling schemes) on
international trade, the relationship between the rules of the multilateral trading
system and the trade provisions contained in multilateral environmental agreements
(MEAs) (such as the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of
Hazardous Wastes), and the transparency of national environmental regulations with
an impact on trade.
7
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
8/101
Rio in 1992 and after
The activation of the EMIT group was followed by further developments in
environmental forums.
The 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), also known
as the Rio "Earth Summit", drew attention to the role of international trade in poverty
alleviation and in combating environmental degradation. Agenda 21, the programme
of action adopted at the conference, also addressed the importance of promoting
sustainable development through, amongst other means, international trade.
The preparatory work for the summit had itself influenced developing countries
approach discussing trade and environment issues in the EMIT group. The concept of"sustainable development" had established a link between environmental protection
and development at large.
These moves were about to yield more concrete results within the trading system. The
environment and trade were to be linked more explicitly in the new constitution of the
multilateral trading system that was to be signed in 1994.
Trade and Environment in the WTOs Founding Charter
The preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade
Organization refers to the importance of working towards sustainable development.
The first paragraph of the preamble4 recognizes sustainable development as an
integral part of the multilateral trading system, which illustrates the importance
placed by WTO members on environmental protection.
4 See under objectives of the WTO, in the next chapter
8
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
9/101
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an international organization designed to
supervise and liberalize international trade. The WTO came into being on January 1,
1995, and is the successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),which was created in 1948. It represents the culmination of an eight-year process of trade
negotiations, known as the Uruguay Round. The WTO is located in Geneva, and is
administered by a secretariat that also facilitates ongoing trade negotiations and oversees
trade dispute resolution. There are currently 146 member countries of the WTO.
The WTO deals with the rules of trade between nations at a global level. It is responsible
for negotiating and implementing new trade agreements, and is in charge of policing
member countries' adherence to all the WTO agreements, signed by the bulk of the
world's trading nations and ratified in theirparliaments. These documents provide the
legal ground rules for international commerce. The agreements are like contracts which
bind governments to keep their trade policies within the boundaries set by the
agreements.
Objectives of the WTO
The reasons for establishing the WTO and the policy objectives of this internationalorganization are set out in the preamble to the WTO Agreement. According to the
preamble, the parties to the WTO Agreement agreed to the terms of this agreement and
the establishment of the WTO "recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and
economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising the standards of living,
ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and
effective demand, and expanding the production of and trade in goods and services,
while allowing for the optimal use of the worlds resources in accordance with the
objective of sustainable development, seeking both to protect and preserve environment
and to enhance the means for doing so in a manner consistent with their respective needs
and concerns at different levels of economic development".
The ultimate objectives of the WTO are thus:
9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
10/101
The increase of standards of living;
The attainment of full employment;
The growth of real income and effective demand; and
The expansion of production of, and trade in, goods and services
However, it is clear from the Preamble that in pursuing these objectives the WTO must
take into account the need for preservation of the environment and the needs of the
developing countries. The Preamble stresses upon the importance of sustainable
economic development and of integration of developing countries, and in particular least-
developed countries, in the world trading system.
Functions of the WTO
Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most
important:
It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered
agreements.
It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes.
Additionally, it is the duty of WTO to review the national trade policies, and to ensure the
coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic
policy-making. Another priority of the WTO is the assistance ofdeveloping, least-
developed and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines
through technical cooperation and training. The WTO is also a center of economic
research and analysis, regular assessments of the global trade picture in its annualpublications and research reports on specific topics are produced by the organization.
Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the Bretton
Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank.
10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_countrieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_countrieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_countries8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
11/101
The Uruguay Round
As mentioned earlier, the World Trade Organization represents the culmination of an
eight-year process of trade negotiations, known as the Uruguay Round.
The Uruguay Round commenced in September1986 and continued until April 1994. The
Round, based on the GATT ministerial meeting in Geneva (1982), was launched in Punta
del Este in Uruguay (hence the name), followed by negotiations in Montreal, Geneva,
Brussels, Washington, D.C., and Tokyo, with the 20 agreements finally being signed in
Marrakech - the Marrakesh Agreement. The Round transformed the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) into the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Despite the profile of the trade and environment issue in the mid to late stages of theUruguay Round,5 the negotiations concluded in the Round did not deal directly with
Trade and Environment issues. This was largely a reflection of the absence of reference
to the environment in the agenda of Uruguay Round. As a consequence, the WTO
agreements that emerged from the Round did not deal with environment as a standalone
issue. Environmental groups made much of the fact that their concerns were not reflected
in the 500 pages of legal texts that emerged from the Round, including the tariff
schedules, running to some 26,000 pages. This perceived neglect of the WTO to deal
directly with the Environmental problems was seen by environmentalists as squandering
a crucial chance to centrally address the trade and environment issue and establish broad
principles to guide the WTO in its future work.
On other environmental-related matters, the Uruguay Round generated results with
varying degrees of ambiguity. In the area of standards, the thrust of the agreements from
the round was to discipline trade barriers while allowing for differences in non-border
measures. Exactly how much discipline would be exerted on National regulations,
especially in the case of sanitary and phytosanitary standards, and what would constitute
sufficient scientific justification for standards that were higher than international
standards, remained unclear. Under the subsidies agreement the use of countervailing
5 A number of events contributed to raising the profile of trade and environment during the later part of Uruguay Round besides thetuna/ dolphin dispute. These included the Earth Summit in Rio in June 1992, the vocal opposition of environmentalists to NAFTA andthe Uruguay Round decisions in the US.
11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GATThttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punta_del_Estehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punta_del_Estehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montrealhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genevahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genevahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brusselshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington%2C_D.C.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marrakechhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization#History_Of_The_WTOhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GATThttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punta_del_Estehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punta_del_Estehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montrealhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genevahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brusselshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington%2C_D.C.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marrakechhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization#History_Of_The_WTOhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
12/101
measures to deal with 'unfair' trade practices in the form of lax environmental standards
was not permitted. But the agreement did imply that subsidies that take the form of
foregone revenue for environmental taxes can be countervailable if they are specific.
Nonetheless, trade and environment issues were important in developments runningparallel to the negotiations themselves, and in particular played a role in defining the
work programme for the WTO following the Round. At the ministerial meeting in
Marrakesh in April 1994, governments agreed that trade and environment should be on
the future agenda for the WTO, and that a Committee on Trade and the Environment
should be formed to assess trade and environment linkages.
Committee on Trade and Environment
When Ministers approved the results of the Uruguay Round negotiations in Marrakesh in
April 1994, they took a decision to begin a comprehensive work programme on trade and
environment in the WTO. During the past five years, this work programme has provided
the focus of discussions in the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE). The CTEs
main aim is to build a constructive relationship between trade and environmental
concerns.
The CTE has a two-fold mandate:
first "to identify the relationship between trade measures and environmental
measures in order to promote sustainable development"; and
second, "to make appropriate recommendations on whether any modifications of
the provisions of the multilateral trading system are required, compatible with the
open, equitable and non-discriminatory nature of the system".
This broad-based mandate covers goods, services, and intellectual property rights and
builds on work carried out in the previous GATT Group on Environmental Measures and
International Trade. Since 1997, the CTE has adopted a thematic approach to its work to
broaden and deepen the discussions and to allow all items of the work programme to be
addressed in a systematic manner. Discussions of the items on the work programme have
12
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
13/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
14/101
The CTE's in its first report in 1996, 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 meeting in October 1999, the CTE agreed 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.
Main points of discussion of the CTEs work programme
Some of the main points of discussion of the CTEs work programme include the
following:
1. Trade measures applied pursuant to MEAs
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. Whilesome MEAs contain trade provisions, trade restrictions are not the only or 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.
14
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
15/101
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.
2. Dispute settlement
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. 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.
3. Eco-labelling
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
15
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
16/101
examination of related issues. The key requirement from the WTOs 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.
4. WTO Transparency Provisions
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 supportiveway. 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
16
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
17/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
18/101
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.
7. Trade in services and TRIPS
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
18
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
19/101
products. However, further work is required in this area, including clarifying the
relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
19
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
20/101
WTO AGREEMENTS
Introduction
Environmental issues began to be systematically addressed in the WTO following the
Decision on Trade and Environment taken towards the end of the Uruguay Round at
Marrakesh in 1994. The Committee on Trade and Environment was established in the
same year, with the explicit mandate to resolve environmental issues in the trading
system. Some new agreements under the WTO also contained environmental provisions.
In 2001 the environment was explicitly put on the negotiating agenda in the Doha
Ministerial Declaration in 2001. Today the environment has been mainstreamed into the
multilateral trading system, and has significant implications for shaping future rules
under the WTO regime.
The WTO's agreements are the legal foundation for the international trading system that
is used by the bulk of the world's trading nations. Most of the WTO agreements are the
result of the 198694 Uruguay Round negotiations, signed at the Marrakesh ministerial
meeting in April 1994. The WTOs agreements are often called the Final Act of the 1986
- 1994 Uruguay Round of trade negotiations. These agreements are also called the
WTOs Trade Rules.
The WTO agreements cover goods, services and intellectual property. They spell out the
principles of liberalization, and the permitted exceptions. They include individual
countries commitments to lower customs tariffs and other trade barriers, and to open and
keep open services markets. They set procedures for settling disputes. They prescribe
special treatment for developing countries. They require governments to make their trade
policies transparent by notifying the WTO about laws in force and measures adopted, and
through regular reports by the secretariat on countries trade policies.
Important WTO Agreements
Some of the important WTO Agreements are summarized below.
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
20
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
21/101
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was the outcome of the failure of
negotiating governments to create the International Trade Organization (ITO). GATT
was formed in 1947 and lasted until 1994, when it was replaced by the World Trade
Organization. The Bretton Woods Conference had introduced the idea for an organization
to regulate trade as part of a larger plan for economic recovery after World War II. As
governments negotiated the ITO, 15 negotiating states began parallel negotiations for the
GATT as a way to attain early tariff reductions. Once the ITO failed in 1950, only the
GATT agreement was left. The GATT's main objective was the reduction of barriers to
international trade. This was achieved through the reduction oftariffbarriers, quantitative
restrictions and subsidies on trade through a series of agreements. The GATT was a
treaty, not an organization. The functions of the GATT were taken over by the World
Trade Organization which was established during the final round of negotiations in early
1990s.
The history of the GATT can be divided into three phases: the first, from 1947 until the
Torquay Round, largely concerned which commodities would be covered by the
agreement and freezing existing tariff levels. A second phase, encompassing three
rounds, from 1959 to 1979, focused on reducing tariffs. The third phase, consisting only
of the Uruguay Round from 1986 to 1994, extended the agreement fully to new areas
such as intellectual property, services, capital, and agriculture. Out of this round the
WTO was born.
In 1993 the GATT was updated (GATT 1994) to include new obligations upon its
signatories. One of the most significant changes was the creation of the World Trade
Organization (WTO).
GATT was a set of rules agreed upon by nations and the WTO is an institutional body.
The WTO expanded its scope from traded goods to trade within the service sector andintellectual property rights. Although it was designed to serve multilateral agreements,
during several rounds of GATT negotiations (particularly the Tokyo Round)plurilateral
agreements created selective trading and caused fragmentation among members. WTO
arrangements are generally a multilateral agreement settlement mechanism of GATT.
21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_Conferencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_quotahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_quotahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_quotahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade#.23Torquay_Round_-_1951http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade#.23Torquay_Round_-_1951http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguay_Roundhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_sectorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_sectorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Property_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurilateralhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_Conferencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariffhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_quotahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_quotahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade#.23Torquay_Round_-_1951http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguay_Roundhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_sectorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Property_Rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurilateral8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
22/101
Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
The agreement recognises that widely varying standards in the protection and
enforcement of intellectual property rights and the lack of a multilateral framework of
principles, rules and disciplines dealing with international trade in counterfeit goods have
been a growing source of tension in international economic relations. Rules and
disciplines were needed to cope with these tensions. To that end, the agreement addresses
the applicability of basic GATT principles and those of relevant international intellectual
property agreements; the provision of adequate intellectual property rights; the provisionof effective enforcement measures for those rights; multilateral dispute settlement; and
transitional arrangements.
Part I of the agreement sets out general provisions and basic principles, notably a
national-treatment commitment under which the nationals of other parties must be given
treatment no less favourable than that accorded to a partys own nationals with regard to
the protection of intellectual property. It also contains a most-favoured-nation clause, a
novelty in an international intellectual property agreement, under which any advantage a party gives to the nationals of another country must be extended immediately and
unconditionally to the nationals of all other parties, even if such treatment is more
favourable than that which it gives to its own nationals.
Part II addresses each intellectual property right in succession. With respect to copyright,
parties are required to comply with the substantive provisions of the Berne Convention
for the protection of literary and artistic works, in its latest version (Paris 1971), though
they will not be obliged to protect moral rights as stipulated in Article 6bis of that
Convention. It ensures that computer programs will be protected as literary works under
the Berne Convention and lays down on what basis data bases should be protected by
copyright. Important additions to existing international rules in the area of copyright and
related rights are the provisions on rental rights. The draft requires authors of computer
22
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
23/101
programmes and producers of sound recordings to be given the right to authorize or
prohibit the commercial rental of their works to the public. A similar exclusive right
applies to films where commercial rental has led to widespread copying which is
materially impairing the right of reproduction. The draft also requires performers to be
given protection from unauthorized recording and broadcast of live performances
(bootlegging). The protection for performers and producers of sound recordings would be
for no less than 50 years. Broadcasting organizations would have control over the use that
can be made of broadcast signals without their authorization. This right would last for at
least 20 years.
With respect to trademarks and service marks, the agreement defines what types of signs
must be eligible for protection as a trademark or service mark and what the minimum
rights conferred on their owners must be. Marks that have become well-known in a
particular country shall enjoy additional protection. In addition, the agreement lays down
a number of obligations with regard to the use of trademarks and service marks, their
term of protection, and their licensing or assignment. For example, requirements that
foreign marks be used in conjunction with local marks would, as a general rule, be
prohibited.
In respect of geographical indications, the agreement lays down that all parties mustprovide means to prevent the use of any indication which misleads the consumer as to the
origin of goods, and any use which would constitute an act of unfair competition. A
higher level of protection is provided for geographical indications for wines and spirits,
which are protected even where there is no danger of the publics being misled as to the
true origin. Exceptions are allowed for names that have already become generic terms,
but any country using such an exception must be willing to negotiate with a view to
protecting the geographical indications in question. Furthermore, provision is made for
further negotiations to establish a multilateral system of notification and registration of
geographical indications for wines.
Industrial designs are also protected under the agreement for a period of 10 years.
Owners of protected designs would be able to prevent the manufacture, sale or
23
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
24/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
25/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
26/101
with it. Dispute settlement would take place under the integrated GATT dispute-
settlement procedures as revised in the Uruguay Round.
With respect to the implementation of the agreement, it envisages a one-year transition
period for developed countries to bring their legislation and practices into conformity.Developing countries and countries in the process of transformation from a centrally-
planned into a market economy would have a five-year transition period, and least-
developed countries 11 years. Developing countries which do not at present provide
product patent protection in an area of technology would have up to 10 years to introduce
such protection. However, in the case of pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical
products, they must accept the filing of patent applications from the beginning of the
transitional period. Though the patent need not be granted until the end of this period, the
novelty of the invention is preserved as of the date of filing the application. If
authorization for the marketing of the relevant pharmaceutical or agricultural chemical is
obtained during the transitional period, the developing country concerned must offer an
exclusive marketing right for the product for five years, or until a product patent is
granted, whichever is shorter.
Subject to certain exceptions, the general rule is that the obligations in the agreement
would apply to existing intellectual property rights as well as to new ones.
The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)
The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) came into force in 1995 and
constitutes the legal framework through which World Trade Organization (WTO)
Members progressively liberalize trade in services, including health-related services.
Within the GATS framework, trade in health services is understood as the provision of
specialized and general health personnel, nursing services, hospital services, ambulance
services, and physiotherapeutic and paramedical services provided by medical and dental
laboratories.
26
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
27/101
GATS allows WTO Members to choose which service sectors to open up to trade and
foreign competition. To date, only 50 WTO Members have made some type of
commitment on health services under GATS, much less than in financial services (100
Members). Liberalization of financial services may have implications for health systems
through its impact on health insurance.
Individual Members' commitments to open markets in specific sectors - and how open
those markets will be - are the outcome of negotiations. The commitments appear in
schedules that list the sectors being opened, the extent of market access offered in those
sectors (e.g. whether there are any restrictions on foreign ownership), and any limitations
on national treatment (whether some rights granted to local companies will not be granted
to foreign companies). For example, a Member could require all foreign-owned hospitals
to provide 25% of beds to care for the uninsured, but this would have to be scheduled as a
national treatment limitation (if it were not already a requirement for locally-owned
hospitals).
The overall aim of GATS is to liberalize trade in services. The agreement covers four
different modes (modes 1-4 trade in services) all of which affect health:
Mode 1 Cross-border supply
Health services provided from the territory of one Member State in the territory of
another Member State. This is usually via interactive audio, visual and data
communication. The patient therefore has the opportunity to consult with physicians in a
different country, as do local doctors. Typical examples include Internet consultation,
diagnosis, treatment and medical education. This form of supply can bring care to under-
served areas, but can be capital intensive and divert resources from other equally pressing
needs.
Mode 2 Consumption abroad
This usually covers incidents when patients seek treatment abroad or are abroad when
they need treatment. This can generate foreign exchange, but equally can crowd out local
27
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
28/101
patients and act as a drain on resources when their treatment is subsidized by the sending
government.
Mode 3 Foreign commercial presence
Health services supplied in one Member State, through commercial presence in the
territory of another Member State. This covers the opening up of the health sector to
foreign companies, allowing them to invest in health operations, health management and
health insurance. It is argued that, on the one hand, FDI can make new services available,
contribute to driving up quality and create employment opportunities. On the downside, it
can help create a two-tier health system and an internal brain-drain - and thus exacerbate
inequity of health provision.
Mode 4 Movement of natural persons (individuals rather than companies)
The temporary movement of a commercial provider of services (for example, a doctor)
from their own country to another country to provide his or her service under contract or
as a member of staff transferred to a different country. This is one of the most contentious
areas for health, as there is concern that it will increase the brain drain of health personnel
from poor to rich countries. However, GATS is concerned only with health professionals
working in other countries on a temporary basis. Brain drain refers to the emigration ofeducated, qualified, and skilled people from poorer countries to richer countries. WHO's
Human Resources for Health initiative aims to increase individual countries' pools of
qualified health staff.
The extent to which GATS will have an impact on public services such as health and
education is controversial. GATS comes into the equation when countries decide to allow
foreign private suppliers to provide services.
Opponents of GATS are convinced that it will limit a state's sovereign powers to protect
human health, and ensure provision of good quality, affordable health services.
Specifically, they fear that progressive liberalization of services under GATS will force
WTO Members to privatize health care currently provided by governments, and that
28
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
29/101
these changes will be irreversible. They are also concerned that the capacity of states to
regulate health-related services will be eroded.
The counter-argument stresses that GATS allows WTO Members to decide for
themselves which sectors will be liberalized and to define country-specific conditions onthe form that liberalization will take. Some WTO Members have already indicated they
will not be requesting or offering commitments on health services in the current
negotiations. Those states that do proceed are not obliged to respond positively to any
particular request. Nor is there any requirement for reciprocity. Moreover, the Doha
declaration specifically reaffirmed the right of Members to regulate or introduce new
regulations on the supply of services. Defenders of GATS therefore argue that national
control over policy and practice has been enhanced.
The political dynamic around GATS may be somewhat different from that affecting the
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement. Many
developing countries are keen to welcome foreign direct investment and to secure access
in the north for their professionals. Many developed countries, on the other hand, are
nervous about the political and economic effects of liberalization on publicly-funded
health services.
GATS is a complex treaty and it does not lay down minimum standards as TRIPS does.
Rather, it takes shape through the process of negotiation. Overall, there is lack of
empirical data on the level of international trade in health-related services, as well as on
the effects of liberalization in specific countries. Finally, trade in services is increasing in
any case (often through bilateral negotiations), thus making attribution to GATS very
difficult.
Certain other WTO Agreements are as follows:
Agreement on Agriculture
The WTO Agreement on Agriculture was one of the many agreements which were
negotiated during the Uruguay Round.
29
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
30/101
The implementation of the Agreement on Agriculture started with effect from January 1,
1995. As per the provisions of the Agreement, the developed countries would complete
their reduction commitments within 6 years, i.e., by the year 2000, whereas the
commitments of the developing countries would be completed within 10 years, i.e., by
the year 2004. The least developed countries are not required to make any reductions.
The products, which are included within the purview of this agreement are what are
normally considered as part of agriculture except that it excludes fishery and forestry
products as well as rubber, jute, sisal, abaca and coir.
Salient Features
The WTO Agreement on Agriculture contains provisions in 3 broad areas of agricultureand trade policy: market access, domestic support and export subsidies.
Market Access
This includes tariffication, tariff reduction and access opportunities. Tariffication means
that all non-tariff barriers such as quotas, variable levies, minimum import prices,
discretionary licensing, state trading measures, voluntary restraint agreements etc. need to
be abolished and converted into an equivalent tariff. Ordinary tariffs including those
resulting from their tariffication are to be reduced by an average of 36% with minimum
rate of reduction of 15% for each tariff item over a 6 year period. Developing countries
are required to reduce tariffs by 24% in 10 years. Developing countries as were
maintaining Quantitative Restrictions due to balance of payment problems, were allowed
to offer ceiling bindings instead of tariffication.
Special safeguard provision allows the imposition of additional duties when there are
either import surges above a particular level or particularly low import prices ascompared to 1986-88 levels.
It has also been stipulated that minimum access equal to 3% of domestic consumption in
1986-88 will have to be established for the year 1995 rising to 5% at end of the
implementation period.
30
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
31/101
Domestic support
For domestic support policies, subject to reduction commitments, the total support given
in 1986-88,measured by the total Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) should be
reduced by 20% in developed countries (13.3% in developing countries). Reductioncommitments refer to total levels of support and not to individual commodities. Policies
which amount to domestic support both under the product specific and non-product
specific categories at less than 5% of the value of production for developed countries and
less than 10% for developing countries are also excluded from any reduction
commitments. Polices which have no or at most minimal trade distorting effects on
production are excluded from any reduction commitments (Green Box-Annex 2 of the
Agreement on Agriculture - http://www.wto.org). The list of exempted green box policies
includes such policies which provide services or benefits to agriculture or the rural
community, public stock holding for food security purposes, domestic food aid and
certain de-coupled payments to producers including direct payments to production
limiting programmes, provided certain conditions are met.
Special and Differential Treatment provisions are also available for developing country
members. These include purchases for and sales from food security stocks at
administered prices provided that the subsidy to producers is included in calculation ofAMS. Developing countries are permitted untargeted subsidised food distribution to meet
requirements of the urban and rural poor. Also excluded for developing countries are
investment subsidies that are generally available to agriculture and agricultural input
subsidies generally available to low income and resource poor farmers in these countries.
Export Subsidies
The Agreement contains provisions regarding member's commitment to reduce Export
Subsidies. Developed countries are required to reduce their export subsidy expenditure by
36% and volume by 21% in 6 years, in equal instalment (from 1986-1990 levels). For
developing countries the percentage cuts are 24% and 14% respectively in equal annual
installment over 10 years. The Agreement also specifies that for products not subject to
export subsidy reduction commitments, no such subsidies can be granted in the future.
31
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
32/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
33/101
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures, by their very nature, may result in restrictions on
trade. All governments accept the fact that some trade restrictions may be necessary to
ensure food safety and animal and plant health protection. However, governments are
sometimes pressured to go beyond what is needed for health protection and to use
sanitary and phytosanitary restrictions to shield domestic producers from economic
competition. Such pressure is likely to increase as other trade barriers are reduced as a
result of the Uruguay Round agreements. A sanitary or phytosanitary restriction which is
not actually required for health reasons can be a very effective protectionist device, and
because of its technical complexity, a particularly deceptive and difficult barrier to
challenge.
The Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) builds on previous GATT
rules to restrict the use of unjustified sanitary and phytosanitary measures for the purpose
of trade protection. The basic aim of the SPS Agreement is to maintain the sovereign
right of any government to provide the level of health protection it deems appropriate, but
to ensure that these sovereign rights are not misused for protectionist purposes and do not
result in unnecessary barriers to international trade.
Justification of measures
The SPS Agreement, while permitting governments to maintain appropriate sanitary and
phytosanitary protection, reduces possible arbitrariness of decisions and encourages
consistent decision-making. It requires that sanitary and phytosanitary measures be
applied for no other purpose than that of ensuring food safety and animal and plant
health. In particular, the agreement clarifies which factors should be taken into account in
the assessment of the risk involved. Measures to ensure food safety and to protect the
health of animals and plants should be based as far as possible on the analysis and
assessment of objective and accurate scientific data.
International standards
The SPS Agreement encourages governments to establish national SPS measures
consistent with international standards, guidelines and recommendations. This process is
33
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
34/101
often referred to as "harmonization". The WTO itself does not and will not develop such
standards. However, most of the WTOs member governments (132 at the date of
drafting) participate in the development of these standards in other international bodies.
The standards are developed by leading scientists in the field and governmental experts
on health protection and are subject to international scrutiny and review.
International standards are often higher than the national requirements of many countries,
including developed countries, but the SPS Agreement explicitly permits governments to
choose not to use the international standards. However, if the national requirement results
in a greater restriction of trade, a country may be asked to provide scientific justification,
demonstrating that the relevant international standard would not result in the level of
health protection the country considered appropriate.
Adapting to conditions
Due to differences in climate, existing pests or diseases, or food safety conditions, it is
not always appropriate to impose the same sanitary and phytosanitary requirements on
food, animal or plant products coming from different countries. Therefore, sanitary and
phytosanitary measures sometimes vary, depending on the country of origin of the food,
animal or plant product concerned. This is taken into account in the SPS Agreement.
Governments should also recognize disease-free areas which may not correspond to
political boundaries, and appropriately adapt their requirements to products from these
areas. The agreement, however, checks unjustified discrimination in the use of sanitary
and phytosanitary measures, whether in favour of domestic producers or among foreign
suppliers.
Alternative measures
An acceptable level of risk can often be achieved in alternative ways. Among the
alternatives and on the assumption that they are technically and economically feasible
and provide the same level of food safety or animal and plant health governments
should select those which are not more trade restrictive than required to meet their health
objective. Furthermore, if another country can show that the measures it applies provide
34
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
35/101
the same level of health protection, these should be accepted as equivalent. This helps
ensure that protection is maintained while providing the greatest quantity and variety of
safe foodstuffs for consumers, the best availability of safe inputs for producers, and
healthy economic competition.
Risk Assessment
The SPS Agreement increases the transparency of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
Countries must establish SPS measures on the basis of an appropriate assessment of the
actual risks involved, and, if requested, make known what factors they took into
consideration, the assessment procedures they used and the level of risk they determined
to be acceptable. Although many governments already use risk assessment in their
management of food safety and animal and plant health, the SPS Agreement encourages
the wider use of systematic risk assessment among all WTO member governments and
for all relevant products.
Transparency
Governments are required to notify other countries of any new or changed sanitary and
phytosanitary requirements which affect trade, and to set up offices (called "Enquiry
Points") to respond to requests for more information on new or existing measures. Theyalso must open to scrutiny how they apply their food safety and animal and plant health
regulations. The systematic communication of information and exchange of experiences
among the WTOs member governments provides a better basis for national standards.
Such increased transparency also protects the interests of consumers, as well as of trading
partners, from hidden protectionism through unnecessary technical requirements.
A special Committee has been established within the WTO as a forum for the exchange
of information among member governments on all aspects related to the implementation
of the SPS Agreement. The SPS Committee reviews compliance with the agreement,
discusses matters with potential trade impacts, and maintains close co-operation with the
appropriate technical organizations. In a trade dispute regarding a sanitary or
35
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
36/101
phytosanitary measure, the normal WTO dispute settlement procedures are used, and
advice from appropriate scientific experts can be sought.
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
The Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement)
addresses two separate but closely related topics: multilateral disciplines regulating the
provision of subsidies, and the use of countervailing measures to offset injury caused by
subsidized imports.
Multilateral disciplines are the rules regarding whether or not a subsidy may be provided
by a Member. They are enforced through invocation of the WTO dispute settlement
mechanism. Countervailing duties are a unilateral instrument, which may be applied by a
Member after an investigation by that Member and a determination that the criteria set
forth in the SCM Agreement are satisfied.
Structure of the Agreement
Part I provides that the SCM Agreement applies only to subsidies that are specifically
provided to an enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries, and defines
both the term subsidy and the concept of specificity. Parts II and III divide all
specific subsidies into one of two categories: prohibited and actionable(1), and establish
certain rules and procedures with respect to each category. Part V establishes the
substantive and procedural requirements that must be fulfilled before a Member may
apply a countervailing measure against subsidized imports. Parts VI and VII establish the
institutional structure and notification/surveillance modalities for implementation of the
SCM Agreement. Part VIII contains special and differential treatment rules for variouscategories of developing country Members. Part IX contains transition rules for
developed country and former centrally-planned economy Members. Parts X and XI
contain dispute settlement and final provisions.
Coverage of the Agreement
36
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/subs_e.htm#fntext1%23fntext1http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/subs_e.htm#fntext1%23fntext18/8/2019 WTO and Environment
37/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
38/101
recipient could have received in the market). In the context of countervailing duties,
Article 14 of the SCM Agreement provides some guidance with respect to determining
whether certain types of measures confer a benefit. the context of multilateral disciplines,
however, the issue of the meaning of benefit is not fully resolved.
Specificity
Assuming that a measure is a subsidy within the meaning of the SCM Agreement, it
nevertheless is not subject to the SCM Agreement unless it has been specifically provided
to an enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries. The basic principle is
that a subsidy that distorts the allocation of resources within an economy should be
subject to discipline. Where a subsidy is widely available within an economy, such a
distortion in the allocation of resources is presumed not to occur. Thus, only specific
subsidies are subject to the SCM Agreement disciplines. There are four types of
specificity within the meaning of the SCM Agreement:
Enterprise-specificity. A government targets a particular company or companies
for subsidization;
Industry-specificity. A government targets a particular sector or sectors for
subsidization.
Regional specificity. A government targets producers in specified parts of its
territory for subsidization.
Prohibited subsidies. A government targets export goods or goods using
domestic inputs for subsidization.
Categories of Subsidies
The SCM Agreement creates two basic categories of subsidies: those that are prohibited,
those that are actionable (i.e., subject to challenge in the WTO or to countervailing
measures). All specific subsidies fall into one of these categories.
Prohibited subsidies
38
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
39/101
Two categories of subsidies are prohibited by Article 3 of the SCM Agreement. The first
category consists of subsidies contingent, in law or in fact, whether wholly or as one of
several conditions, on export performance (export subsidies). A detailed list of export
subsidies is annexed to the SCM Agreement. The second category consists of subsidies
contingent, whether solely or as one of several other conditions, upon the use of domestic
over imported goods (local content subsidies). These two categories of subsidies are
prohibited because they are designed to directly affect trade and thus are most likely to
have adverse effects on the interests of other Members.
The scope of these prohibitions is relatively narrow. Developed countries had already
accepted the prohibition on export subsidies under the Tokyo Round SCM Agreement,
and local content subsidies of the type prohibited by the SCM Agreement were already
inconsistent with Article III of the GATT 1947. What is most significant about the new
Agreement in this area is the extension of the obligations to developing country Members
subject to specified transition rules (see section below on special and differential
treatment), as well as the creation in Article 4 of the SCM Agreement of a rapid (three-
month) dispute settlement mechanism for complaints regarding prohibited subsidies.
Actionable subsidies
Most subsidies, such as production subsidies, fall in the actionable category.
Actionable subsidies are not prohibited. However, they are subject to challenge, either
through multilateral dispute settlement or through countervailing action, in the event that
they cause adverse effects to the interests of another Member. There are three types of
adverse effects. First, there is injury to a domestic industry caused by subsidized imports
in the territory of the complaining Member. This is the sole basis for countervailing
action. Second, there is serious prejudice. Serious prejudice usually arises as a result of
adverse effects (e.g., export displacement) in the market of the subsidizing Member or ina third country market. Thus, unlike injury, it can serve as the basis for a complaint
related to harm to a Member's export interests. Finally, there is nullification or
impairment of benefits accruing under the GATT 1994. Nullification or impairment
39
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
40/101
arises most typically where the improved market access presumed to flow from a bound
tariff reduction is undercut by subsidization.
The creation of a system of multilateral remedies that allows Members to challenge
subsidies which give rise to adverse effects represents a major advance over the pre-WTO regime. The difficulty, however, will remain the need in most cases for a
complaining Member to demonstrate the adverse trade effects arising from subsidization,
a fact-intensive analysis that panels may find difficult in some cases(2).
Agricultural subsidies
Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture establishes, during the implementation period
specified in that Agreement (until 1 January 2003), special rules regarding subsidies foragricultural products. Export subsidies which are in full conformity with the Agriculture
Agreement are not prohibited by the SCM Agreement, although they remain
countervailable. Domestic supports which are in full conformity with the Agriculture
Agreement are not actionable multilaterally, although they also may be subject to
countervailing duties. Finally, domestic supports within the green box of the
Agriculture Agreement are not actionable multilaterally nor are they subject to
countervailing measures. After the implementation period, the SCM Agreement shall
apply to subsidies for agricultural products subject to the provisions of the Agreement on
Agriculture, as set forth in its Article 21.
Countervailing Measures
Part V of the SCM Agreement sets forth certain substantive requirements that must be
fulfilled in order to impose a countervailing measure, as well as in-depth procedural
requirements regarding the conduct of a countervailing investigation and the imposition
and maintenance in place of countervailing measures. A failure to respect either the
substantive or procedural requirements of Part V can be taken to dispute settlement and
may be the basis for invalidation of the measure.
Substantive rules A Member may not impose a countervailing measure unless it
determines that there are subsidized imports, injury to a domestic industry, and a causal
40
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/subs_e.htm#fntext2%23fntext2http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/subs_e.htm#fntext2%23fntext28/8/2019 WTO and Environment
41/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
42/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
43/101
Members in transformation to a market economy are given a seven-year period to phase
out prohibited subsidies. These subsidies must, however, have been notified within two
years of the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement (i.e., by 31 December 1996)
in order to benefit from the special treatment. Members in transformation also receive
preferential treatment with respect to actionable subsidies.
Dispute Settlement
The SCM Agreement generally relies on the dispute settlement rules of the DSU.
However the Agreement contains extensive special or additional dispute settlement rules
and procedures providing, inter alia, for expedited procedures, particularly in the case of
prohibited subsidy allegations. It also provides special mechanisms for the gathering of
information necessary to assess the existence of serious prejudice in actionable subsidy
cases.
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
This agreement clarifies the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade reached in the
Tokyo Round. It seeks to ensure that technical negotiations and standards, as well as
testing and certification procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade.
However, it recognizes that countries have the right to establish protection, at levels they
consider appropriate, for example for human, animal or plant life or health or the
environment, and should not be prevented from taking measures necessary to ensure
those levels of protection are met. The agreement therefore encourages countries to use
international standards where these are appropriate, but it does not require them to change
their levels of protection as a result of standardization.
Innovative features of the revised agreement are that it covers processing and production
methods related to the characteristics of the product itself. The coverage of conformity
assessment procedures is enlarged and the disciplines made more precise. Notification
provisions applying to local government and non-governmental bodies are elaborated in
more detail than in the Tokyo Round agreement. A Code of Good Practice for the
Preparation, Adoption and Application of Standards by standardizing bodies, which is
43
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
44/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
45/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
46/101
the measures contained in MEAs also have positive social and economic impacts. For
example, the harmonization of standards and practices encouraged by many MEAs is
designed to enhance environmental protection, but may also have positive effects on
trade and the economy by avoiding trade distortions, facilitating the technical and legal
implementation of standards and technical regulations, and assisting consumers in their
decision-making.
Trade-related measures are sometimes also needed and incorporated in MEAs to address
other types of problems, such as the lack of adequate data and information for policy
development or decision-making and the absence of incentives to contribute to the
protection of public environmental goods. Trade-related measures also play an important
role in supporting other MEA provisions, including the phase-out of certain substances,
and ensuring the effectiveness of MEAs, for example by assisting in compliance and
enforcement.
Basic information on selected MEAs
Following is very basic information on the most salient global MEAs. Some of these
conventions are directly administered by UNEP while others fall within different United
Nations or other regional organizations administration.
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands
Other names Ramsar convention Conventions charge is to promote the conservationand wise use of all wetlandsthrough local, regional, andnational actions andinternational cooperation, asa contribution towardsachieving sustainabledevelopment worldwide.
SignatureDate
Ramsar02.02.1971
Date of entryinto force
01.12.1975
Link http://www.ramsar.org
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and
Fauna
Other names CITES Aims to ensure that
46
http://www.ramsar.org/http://www.ramsar.org/8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
47/101
international trade inspecimens of wild animalsand plants does not threatentheir survival. Subjectinginternational trade in
specimens of selectedspecies to certain controlsvia licensing of import,export, re-export, andintroduction from the sea ofspecies.
SignatureDate
Washington, D.C03.03.1973
Date of entryinto force
01.07.1975
Link http://www.cites.org
Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
Other names CMS or Bonn Convention Aims to conserve terrestrial,
marine, and avian speciesthat migrate across or out ofnational limits. Theprotection of these animals by conserving or restoringtheir habitats and mitigatingobstacles to migration issought through thisagreement.
SignatureDate
Bonn23.06.1979
Date of entryinto force
01.11.1983
Link http://www.cms.int
Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer
Other names Vienna Convention Aims at establishing theframework for co-oparation,development and policies,and formulation of agreedmeasures in order to protecthuman health and theenvironment against adverseeffects resulting or likely toresult from human activitieswhich modify the ozonelayer (art.2).
SignatureDate
Vienna22.09.1988
Date of entryinto force
1988
Link http://ozone.unep.org
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
Other names Montreal Protocol Aims at protecting theozone layer by takingmeasures to control globalemissions of substances thatdeplete it. Its
Signaturedate
Montreal16.09.1987
Date of entryinto force
01.01.1989
47
http://www.cites.org/http://www.cms.int/http://ozone.unep.org/http://www.cites.org/http://www.cms.int/http://ozone.unep.org/8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
48/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
49/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
50/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
51/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
52/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
53/101
countries have used a combination of both these mechanisms, while at other times, there
has been no action at all and no implementation mechanisms were established. The two
mechanisms used by countries are discussed below.
1. Enacting laws
A country can enact a domestic law that incorporates what has been agreed upon at the
multilateral level. The advantage of this is that when the domestic law includes
internationally agreed provisions, it becomes legally binding in nature. This indicates a
strong commitment on the part of a country to implement these provisions. However, as
noted earlier, such laws are often not enforced in many developing countries for reasons
such as an inadequate legal system, long waiting lists for hearing cases, low penalties
attached etc. This implies that actual implementation of the laws may not take place.
The following are a few examples of enactment of local laws in response to international
agreements. The Philippines passed an act known as the Toxic Substances and Hazardous
and Nuclear Waste Act of 1990, which was inspired by the Montreal Protocol. The Act
bans the importation, storage and transportation of toxic nuclear wastes into or through
the Philippines. In response to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, an administrative order was issued
by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources which restricts importing
recyclable materials containing hazardous substances. In response to the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development, in 1992, the country promulgated
Republic Act 7586 of 1992, which provides for the establishment of a national integrated
protected areas system to conserve and use biodiversity in a sustainable manner. As a
response to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, an executive
order was issued establishing an inter-agency committee on climate change. In order to
comply with provisions of the Conference held in Stockholm in 1972, Malaysia enactedthe Environment Quality Act in 1974 and established the Department of Environment.
Many Pacific island countries have prepared comprehensive environ-mental legislation,
largely in response to the call in the Rio Declaration for countries to enact environment
legislation for the elimination of unsustainable patterns of production and consumption.
53
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
54/101
8/8/2019 WTO and Environment
55/101
out by 2010). It granted incentives such as tax exemptions to shift to non-ozone depleting
substance technologies through the Board of Investment.
Fiji responded to the Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol by giving incentives
to research and development activities, and developed a nonchemical quarantinetreatment technology which has given its agricultural products a competitive advantage in
the international markets.
After the Montreal Protocol, India conducted three workshops for small and medium-
sized enterprises in 1996 to assist them in phasing out ozone depleting substances, gave
full exemptions from all forms of duties on goods required to phase out these substances
for all enterprises, banned their export to developed countries, imposed licensing for
using the substances as inputs, and prepared comprehensive regulations on phase-out of
the substances.
However, as mentioned earlier, the incorporation of agreements in domestic policy does
not necessarily lead to effective implementation. The following examples illustrate that
point.
Following the Rio Conference, Pacific island countries developed their own national
programme called Capacity 21 to implement Agenda 21 of the Rio Conference. Thenational programmes aimed to promote the role of NGOs and landowners and to help
them to come together with other stakeholders in developing a framework for the
integration of environment with development. However, despite the initial enthusiasm,
the programmes seem to have lost momentum in most of the countries. The Tonga case
study reports that there has been little progress in pursuing the call for improved
collection, analysis and presentation of environmental data and information. As a result,
periodic analysis of environment conditions and trends is not undertaken. There is neither
a programme of action to this e
Top Related