Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 6 • Number 4 • 3rd March 2006
“STEP-BY-STEP” APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS LIBERALISATION CONSIDERED
“STEP-BY-STEP” APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS LIBERALISATION CONSIDERED
During an formal 21-22 February meeting of the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment Special Session (CTE-SS), Members decided on a work plan to consider the products that have been notified as potential environmental goods, but differed on what criteria should be used to evaluate them and whether single-use products should be addressed first, or simultaneously, with dual-use products. Divisions, however, remain about the broad approach to follow when liberalising trade in environmental goods, as well as on the overall scope of products to be discussed. Members also remain uncertain about how to address issues such as special and differential treatment for developing countries and non-tariff barriers.
Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Declaration mandated Members to negotiate on "the reduction or, as appropriate, elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services". The December 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration instructed them to complete this work "expeditiously" (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 20 January 2006).
Chair, US propose parameters to identify environmental goods
Members adopted a step-by-step approach towards fulfilling the Paragraph 31(iii) mandate. They decided to consider products from among the 480 that have already been identified in the environmental goods lists submitted by nine Members (and compiled into an informal document by the WTO Secretariat in November 2005, TN/TE/W/63). This would not preclude the future consideration of goods not included in the compilation.
Countries are considering two sets of ‘indicative parameters’ for evaluating some of these products. The first set, which was proposed by CTE-SS Chair Ambassador Toufiq Ali (Bangladesh) a week before the meeting, asks whether the product has a clear and direct environmental end use; what environmental products, categories of products or projects are of particular interest to developing country Members; and what other considerations may be taken into account when determining whether a product constitutes an environmental good. The second, more product-specific set was tabled by the US on the day of the meeting (TN/TE/W/64). It asks whether the product has a clear and direct environmental benefit; if any potential dual or multiple uses could be addressed by using a narrower product description at the national level; whether the product is "so central to the delivery of key environmental and developmental benefits… that its exclusion from liberalisation would reduce the intended environmental benefits" of the initiative; and if the product is sensitive or raised other concerns for delegations. The US proposal, furthermore, urged Members not to continue "the same kind of unstructured debate" as last year.
Issue of multiple use of products, focus categories remains divisive
After consulting with several Members on the second day of negotiations, Ali proposed discussing the merits of some proposed products in four categories — renewable energy, air pollution control, wastewater treatment and soil remediation — in a technical meeting during the next CTE-SS. India, on behalf of a group of ten developing countries including Argentina, Brazil, China, Egypt, Mexico and South Africa, rejected that suggestion. Instead, it proposed that Members examine products in the categories of renewable energy and air pollution control, apply the criteria of single environmental end-use as a filter, and to examine the remaining products against cross-cutting issues such as special and differential treatment, related non-tariff barriers and technology transfer. The US expressed opposition to proceeding in such a manner, indicating that it would prefer to proceed quickly to the consideration of multiple use products, and to discuss other issues later. Cuba also raised some doubts about the practicality of applying the parameters first for single-use renewable energy and air pollution control products, and then restarting the whole exercise for multiple use products in the same categories.
As a result of these disagreements and the existence of the two sets of parameters for evaluating products, the procedure to be adopted at the next meeting remained somewhat ambiguous. The Chair emphasised, however, that all proposals related to products within the categories of air pollution control and renewable energy tabled prior to the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference would be discussed.
List approach criticised once again
At the meeting, divisions emerged once again between proponents of the so-called "list approach", who have proposed identifying a list of environmental goods for liberalisation, and those — primarily from developing countries — sceptical of the approach. India, which under its "environmental project approach" has proposed temporarily liberalising market access for certain goods and services used in approved "environmental projects" (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 23 June 2005), contends that the environmental character of some of the lists that countries have put forward is called into question by the fact that they include many products with multiple uses. According to one developing country delegate, industrialised countries that have already put forward lists have simply adopted those put together either by the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) or the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) — organisations that many developing countries are not members of — without having made an effort to filter the products contained therein on the basis of environmental merit.
The next meeting of the CTE-SS will be held on 14-15 June.
ICTSD reporting.