WTO Ministerial Section • Volume 5 • Number 4 • 4th March 2005
Environmental Goods Dominate CTE Agenda
ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS DOMINATE CTE AGENDA Delegates at the special session of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) on 24-25 February focused their discussions almost entirely on environmental goods, with new submissions by Korea, New Zealand and the EC. Several of the developed countries urged Members to pick up the pace with the aim of agreeing on a list by the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, raising some resistance among developing countries who argued that so far they could see nothing of interest to them coming out of the negotiations.
The short regular session of the CTE on 22 February, preceded by informal consultations, focused on how to structure discussions under paragraph 32(i) regarding the effects of environmental measures on market access. Members also agreed to hold a workshop on paragraph 51 in October 2005.
EC submission proves controversial
The EC submission (TN/TE/W/47) met with greatest resistance, in particular the suggestion to not only include goods used in pollution control and resource management, but also "goods that have a high environmental performance or low environmental impacts". The EC acknowledged that some of these products might need to be defined through standards, which require certification, proposing to use schemes included in the existing international network Global Ecolabelling Network. The proposal was widely rejected by many developing countries who resisted the inclusion of PPM-based environmental goods as well as eco-labels. The EC expressed disappointment with the negative reception, noting that at this point few alternatives had been put forward. They also stressed that not all environmentally preferable products would necessarily be distinguished on the basis of PPMs.
Among the three new proposals, Korea’s submission (TN/TE/W/48) attracted most support as a practical way forward. Korea stressed the need for "practical and simple" criteria for the identification of environmental goods, suggesting a number of criteria they had used to draw up their proposed list. These include that the end use of the products should be primarily for an environmental purpose, that products should be classifiable under the HS code and that environmentally preferable products and goods that are defined by the process and production methods (PPM) or their superior environmental performance should be excluded "for practical reasons". The submission also includes a proposed list of 89 products primarily related to "pollution management".
In its generally well-received submission (TN/TE/W/47), New Zealand suggested to use certain "reference points" that could be cited to initiate "a discussion about the environmental credential of a specific good", such as the OECD definition of environmental industries, APEC’s conceptualisation of environmental goods or approaches to environmental goods agreed through "high quality and comprehensive regional or bilateral Free Trade Agreements". Several delegations remained sceptical regarding the use of FTAs, questioning in particular what was meant by a "high quality" FTA. New Zealand also supported the US’ proposal to identify a ‘core list’ and a complementary list of goods (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 30 April 2004). Such lists should be "living lists", New Zealand suggested, which could be updated at a later stage to respond to the dynamic nature of environmental goods. Several Members requested further clarification on how a living list would work and how long it would continue to "live".
The Committee discussed the possibility of holding another intersessional meeting in addition to the two scheduled meetings. In particular the developed countries would like to see the list finalised by the Hong Kong Ministerial meeting in December. Many of the developing countries, however, resisted pressure to speed up the discussion and set concrete deadlines, expressing concerns that the negotiations so far did not contain anything of interest to them. Canada urged these countries to come forward with their proposed lists, including goods of interest to them.
On paragraph 31(i) regarding the MEA-WTO relationship, the Secretariat presented its revised Matrix of trade measures in MEAs. Little discussion took place on this negotiating item.
Regular CTE session
At the regular session of the CTE, the Chair presented a proposal for how to structure the discussions under paragraph 32(i), suggesting four main issues that have been raised by delegations during discussions: using a sectoral approach to considering the effect of environmental measures on market access by identifying sector-specific environmental requirements which impact export performance; "process issues" in the areas of transparency, notification and consultation procedures when preparing an environmental regulation; technical assistance to assist developing countries in compliance with new environmental requirements; and issues concerning the preparation of environmental measures.
Members also agreed to hold a workshop on paragraph 51 (which mandates the CTE and the Committee on Trade and Development to ensure that sustainable development is adequately reflected in the negotiations) on 10-11 October, but failed to adopt the proposed agenda for the meeting. Qatar, supported by Venezuela, suggested that energy-related issues should be discussed in this context.
For a collection of trade and environment-related submissions, see trade-environment.org.
ICTSD reporting.