Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest • Volume 8 • Number 34 • 13th October 2004
Procedural Issues, Environmental Goods Dominate WTO Environment Negotiations
WTO Members at the special (negotiating) session of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), meeting from 12-13 October, continued their discussions on the relationship between WTO rules and multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). Members focused on a submission by Australia on its national experiences on negotiating and implementing specific trade obligations (STOs) in MEAs. Members also discussed a proposed list by Chinese Taipei of possible environmental goods. Mirroring past meetings, debates on both topics revolved mainly around procedural issues, i.e. whether discussions should follow a practical or a conceptual approach, or both.
MEAs-WTO: National experiences versus principles
Australia in its submission (TN/TE/W/45, available at http://docsonline.wto.org/) presented its national experience in negotiating and implementing the Basel Convention on trade in hazardous waste, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) and the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances. Australia stressed the need for effective coordination at the national level between domestic agencies and stakeholders as a "key to achieving compatibility between countries’ different international obligations and their smooth domestic implementation". While acknowledging the importance of national coordination, the EC stressed that coordination at the international level was equally important.
Australia’s submission gave rise to a general debate on the best approach to the negotiations (see BRIDGES Weekly, 23 June 2004). Australia is a firm supporter of a ‘practical’ approach to the discussions based on national experiences, arguing that this can help improve understanding of STOs in MEAs and their relationship with WTO rules. While supporting this approach, the EC and Switzerland also stress the need for a complementary debate on basic principles underlying the WTO-MEA relationship. Noting a widespread support for the practical approach, Chair Ambassador Toufiq Ali of Bangladesh encouraged Members to focus efforts on this avenue for the time being.
Environmental goods: list versus definition
Chinese Taipei formally submitted its proposed list of possible environmental goods, which had already been circulated as an informal document at the last CTE meeting. The list includes primarily the more traditional (i.e. end-of-pipe) environmental goods, mirroring a list developed by APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation). Several Members welcomed in particular the concept of a "direct use" characteristic for identifying environmental goods, i.e. goods that "directly control pollution".
The EC noted that Members in addition to submitting their proposed lists might want to consider the principles underlying their decision to include certain goods. Such principles could relate to the classification of goods under the Harmonised System (i.e. codes used by customs officials), non-tariff barriers, or goods with multiple end-uses. The US expressed concern that Members could get bogged down in the debate on principles, favouring instead a more concrete discussion.
Korea and Switzerland announced their intention to submit their proposed lists by the next CTE meeting. Qatar, supported by Venezuela, again referred to its submission on natural gas technologies which it would like to see taken up in the negotiations (TN/TE/W/14). The EC also suggested that Members might want to hold an informal meeting between now and the next CTE meeting if they felt that enough material was available for further debate.
Members widely welcomed the papers presented by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (TN/TE/INF/7) and the OECD (TN/TE/INF/8). The World Customs Organisation also presented at the meeting on the difficulties that might arise when including environmental goods in the Harmonised System. He noted that the System only distinguished between products based on their physical characteristics, and that it therefore did not lend itself to denoting goods depending on the process and production methods (PPM) used or on their end-use (i.e. environmental or otherwise).
The next meeting of the CTE special session will be held in February 2004.
ICTSD reporting.