Paragraph General by alicejenny

VIEWS: 3 PAGES: 33

									 WORLD TRADE                                                               WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                           27 November 2006
 ORGANIZATION
                                                                           (06-5688)

 Committee on Trade and Environment



                     ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE NEGOTIATIONS

                                            Note by the Secretariat


                      This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own
                     responsibility and without prejudice to the positions of Members
                           and to their rights and obligations under the WTO.


I.      INTRODUCTION

1.       Pursuant to Paragraph 51 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, "The Committee on Trade and
Development and the Committee on Trade and Environment shall, within their respective mandates,
each act as a forum to identify and debate developmental and environmental aspects of the
negotiations, in order to help achieve the objective of having sustainable development appropriately
reflected."

2.      At its meeting of 5 July 2006, with a view to further facilitate the identification and debate
under Paragraph 51 of the environmental aspects of the negotiations, the Committee on Trade and
Environment (CTE) requested the Secretariat to prepare a paper compiling the statements previously
made by the Secretariat on the environment-related issues in the various negotiating groups (see
paragraph 6 below).1

3.       This paper has been prepared in response to that request. It compiles the statements by the
Secretariat made in 2002-2003 and subsequently updated in 2005 on the environment-related issues in
the various negotiating groups, namely negotiations on agriculture (section A, pages 3-6), market
access for non-agricultural products (section B, pages 6-10), rules (section C, pages 10-12) and
services (section D, pages 13-17). For the purposes of the present version of the paper, these have
been further updated to reflect the state-of-play as of July 2006. The area of trade and environment
negotiations (section E, pages 17-23) has been added to the present paper to ensure that it is
comprehensive in its coverage of the negotiations. In each area, following a brief summary of the
status of the negotiations, sub-sections set out the environment-related aspects; specific proposals and
discussions related to the environment; and possible benefits to the environment and contribution to
sustainable development.

4.      This paper is prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and by no means claims to
cover exhaustively all the environmental aspects raised in the course of the negotiations. Nor should
the paper be seen as an attempt to prioritize issues, subjects or concerns raised by individual Members
or groups of Members. Finally, this paper does not prejudice the right of any Member to raise other
views related to Paragraph 51 of the Doha Ministerial.



        1
            WT/CTE/M/42, 1 September 2006
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 2


II.     BACKGROUND

5.      Following adoption of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, at a CTE meeting in June 2002,
Members held an initial exchange of views on how to structure the debate. There was general
agreement that the approach to address Paragraph 51 should be Member-driven in order to identify
elements from the negotiations for debate, with inputs from the Secretariat as appropriate. The
importance of the mandate was stressed, and it was noted that Paragraph 51 was a standing item on
the agendas of both the CTE and the CTD.2

6.      At the meeting in October 2002, delegations agreed to take a sectoral approach to the mandate
and the Secretariat was invited to brief the CTE on relevant developments in various negotiating
areas.3 In 2003, the CTE received briefings by the Secretariat in the following negotiating areas:
agriculture (WT/CTE/GEN/8), market access for non-agricultural products (WT/CTE/GEN/9), rules
(WT/CTE/GEN/10) and services (WT/CTE/GEN/11).4 This was followed by a substantive exchange
on different areas which included: non-trade concerns mentioned in the Preamble of the Agreement
on Agriculture, trade-distorting agricultural policies, fishery subsidies, liberalization of environmental
goods and services, classification of environmental services, regulatory issues with respect to services,
Paragraph 51 on sustainable development and developing countries, and coordination between the
CTE and the CTD in the context of Paragraph 51 work. The CTE's 2003 report to the General
Council reflected, among others, its work on Paragraph 51.5

7.      In 2004, having heard in 2003 the series of briefings mentioned above, the Committee sought
ways to carry forward its work. It was agreed that the Chairperson of the CTE would meet with the
Chairperson of the CTD to exchange information on how the Paragraph 51 mandate had been taken
up in the two respective Committees.6 Subsequently, an oral report was provided to the CTE by its
Chairperson.7

8.      In 2005, following a request from Members in the CTE,8 the Secretariat organized a WTO
Symposium on Trade and Sustainable Development within the Framework of Paragraph 51 of the
Doha Ministerial Declaration on 10-11 October. The event was open to WTO Members and
observers and drew on the contribution of representatives from various international organizations and
other professionals with expertise on the specific issues addressed. After a high-level segment
introducing the concept of sustainable development and its relevance in the context of the Doha Work
Programme and highlighting as well the potential contribution of trade towards achieving the
objective of sustainable development, individual panels focussed on selected issues of the Doha
negotiations, namely Agriculture, Fisheries Subsidies and Environmental Goods and Services, and
addressed other selected issues of the Doha Work Programme of particular interest to developing
countries, namely the relationship between the Convention on Biological Diversity and the TRIPS
Agreement, and the role of intellectual property rights in facilitating transfer of technology. The final
session was a roundtable with representatives from different international organizations on capacity
building activities to promote sustainable development. At the back-to-back CTE meeting on
12 October, the Symposium generated further discussions on Paragraph 51.9



        2
            WT/CTE/M/30, 11 September 2002
        3
            WT/CTE/M/31, 2 December 2002
          4
             Subsequently, updates of the Secretariat briefings were provided at the CTE meeting of October 2005
(WT/CTE/GEN/8/Suppl.1, WT/CTE/GEN/9/Add.1, WT/CTE/GEN/10/Suppl.1 and WT/CTE/GEN/11/Suppl.1 dated 5
October, 10 October, 5 October, and 11 October 2005 respectively).
          5
            WT/CTE/9, 11 July 2003
          6
            WT/CTE/M/36, 19 May 2004
          7
            WT/CTE/M/38, 20 December 2004
          8
            WT/CTE/M/39, 2 May 2005
          9
            WT/CTE/M/41
                                                                                                           WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                                  Page 3


III.      ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

A.        NEGOTIATIONS ON AGRICULTURE10

1.        Status of the Negotiations

9.      The preamble to the Agreement on Agriculture states that commitments under the reform
programme established a basis for starting a process of reform and notes that the commitments should
have regard to non-trade concerns, including food security and the need to protect the environment.

10.      The negotiations on agriculture started in March 2000 in accordance with Article 20 of the
Agreement on Agriculture. This Article recognised the long-term objective of achieving substantial
progressive reductions in support and protection, and required that the negotiations take into account a
number of factors, including: the experience of implementing the results of the Uruguay Round; the
effects of Members' Uruguay Round commitments on world trade; non-trade concerns; special and
differential treatment; the objective of establishing a fair and market-oriented agriculture trading
system; and the other objectives set out in the preamble to the Agreement on Agriculture.

11.     The Doha Ministerial Declaration (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1) put the negotiations on a new
footing. Under the Doha mandate, Members committed themselves to comprehensive negotiations
"aimed at substantial improvements in market access; reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all
forms of export subsidies; and substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support. [...]
Special and differential treatment for developing countries shall be an integral part of all elements of
the negotiations and shall be embodied in the Schedules of concessions and commitments and as
appropriate, in the rules and disciplines to be negotiated so as to be operationally effective and to
enable developing countries to effectively take account of their development needs, including food
security and rural development." Furthermore, Ministers confirmed that non-trade concerns would be
taken into account in the negotiations as provided for in the Agreement on Agriculture.

12.     The Framework for Establishing Modalities in Agriculture in Annex A of the Decision
Adopted by the General Council on 1 August 2004 (WT/L/579) added significant further detail to all
aspects of the negotiating mandate, and again confirmed that non-trade concerns would be taken into
account.

          10
             Paragraph 13 of the Doha Declaration: "We recognize the work already undertaken in the negotiations initiated
in early 2000 under Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture, including the large number of negotiating proposals
submitted on behalf of a total of 121 members. We recall the long-term objective referred to in the Agreement to establish a
fair and market-oriented trading system through a programme of fundamental reform encompassing strengthened rules and
specific commitments on support and protection in order to correct and prevent restrictions and distortions in world
agricultural markets. We reconfirm our commitment to this programme. Building on the work carried out to date and without
prejudging the outcome of the negotiations we commit ourselves to comprehensive negotiations aimed at: substantial
improvements in market access; reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms of export subsidies; and substantial
reductions in trade-distorting domestic support. We agree that special and differential treatment for developing countries
shall be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations and shall be embodied in the schedules of concessions and
commitments and as appropriate in the rules and disciplines to be negotiated, so as to be operationally effective and to enable
developing countries to effectively take account of their development needs, including food security and rural development.
We take note of the non-trade concerns reflected in the negotiating proposals submitted by Members and confirm that non-
trade concerns will be taken into account in the negotiations as provided for in the Agreement on Agriculture."

          Paragraph 14 of the Doha Declaration: "Modalities for the further commitments, including provisions for special
and differential treatment, shall be established no later than 31 March 2003. Participants shall submit their comprehensive
draft Schedules based on these modalities no later than the date of the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference. The
negotiations, including with respect to rules and disciplines and related legal texts, shall be concluded as part and at the date
of conclusion of the negotiating agenda as a whole."
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 4


13.     The Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration (WT/MIN(05)/DEC) built on the Doha Ministerial
Declaration and the Framework in several areas, such as providing a date for the final elimination of
all forms of export subsidies. However, after months of intensive negotiations there was not sufficient
convergence between Members to enable modalities to be established. The Draft Possible Modalities
on Agriculture (TN/AG/W/3) sets out the different proposals on different issues. Like negotiations in
other areas, the negotiations on agriculture were suspended following the General Council meeting on
27 July 2006.

2.      Environment-related Aspects

(a)     Non-trade Concerns

14.      Throughout the agriculture negotiations, environmental issues have been discussed as non-
trade concerns. Many Members have presented views and tabled proposals on this subject.
Essentially, the debate has not centred on the question whether non-trade concerns, such as the
protection of the environment, are legitimate policy objectives – this view is widely shared – but
rather the debate has centred around what the appropriate and effective instruments are to achieve
these objectives. It may also be worthwhile noting that, in the context of the discussions on these
matters, several developing countries have made the point that their non-trade concerns are of a
fundamentally different dimension to those of developed countries.

15.      During the first two years of the negotiations, March 2000 to March 2002, Members
submitted to the Committee on Agriculture, either individually or as co-sponsors, various proposals
outlining their aspirations for the negotiations, including with respect to environment related policies.
These proposals were the subject of in-depth discussion within the Committee. Many of the non-trade
concerns raised during this period, which included those relating to environmental policies, were
discussed in the context of possible modifications to Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture, the so
called 'Green Box', and Article 6.2 which provides for developing countries, exemptions from
reduction commitments for certain programmes. A survey of the specific proposals discussed over
this period is contained in the Overview Paper on the negotiations (TN/AG/6).

16.     The negotiations that led to the Agreed Framework focused less on the objectives of support
and more on the means by which such support can be delivered. Thus, although various issues,
including non-trade concerns, were no longer necessarily the main focus of discussions, they
remained firmly on the table. Furthermore, these issues remained important on how Members
approached the negotiations and how they responded to new ideas and proposals.

17.      With respect to the Green Box, which many Members consider would be the appropriate
means by which environmental objectives might be addressed, the Agreed Framework states that
"Green Box criteria will be reviewed and clarified with a view to ensuring that Green Box measures
have no, or at most minimal, trade-distorting effects or effects on production. Such a review and
clarification will need to ensure that the basic concepts, principles and effectiveness of the Green Box
remain and take due account of non-trade concerns."

18.      This precision was further amplified in the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration which states
"Green Box criteria will be reviewed in line with Paragraph 16 of the Framework, inter alia, to ensure
that programmes of developing country Members that cause not more than minimal trade-distortion
are effectively covered."

(b)     Environment Impact of Protection and Trade-distorting Support in Agriculture

19.      In terms of the actual environment policy related discussions, the role of protection and trade-
distorting support featured prominently. Although many Members recognize that agricultural
                                                                                         WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                Page 5


production can have both positive and negative effects on the environment, there are, however,
different views about the environmental impact of trade-distorting agricultural policies.

20.      A number of developed and developing Members have emphasized that trade and
environmental protection can be mutually positively reinforcing and that reducing trade distortions
can improve the environment through its positive impact on resource use. In their view, protection
and trade-distorting domestic support policies encourage environmentally harmful agricultural
practices, such as intensive farming, including high use of fertilizers and pesticides. The result can be
resource degradation and environmental stress, such as adverse effects on the ground water, the soil
and biodiversity. Furthermore, these Members noted that trade-distorting support, including export
subsidies, can also have negative environmental effects in third countries, particularly developing
countries, because these measures drive down international prices and increase their volatility. As a
result, returns from agriculture in developing countries are lower than otherwise, thus exacerbating
poverty and making it even more difficult for farmers in these countries to move towards more
environmentally sustainable practices. These Members have, therefore, advocated a reduction in
protection and trade-distorting agricultural support as a way of simultaneously advancing trade,
development and environmental objectives.

21.     Other Members have highlighted the positive environmental effects of agriculture, including
land conservation, management of water resources, preservation of biodiversity and habitats and
maintaining the landscape. In their view, a certain level of trade-distorting domestic support may be
necessary to maintain agricultural production, especially in areas with low agricultural potential, and
thus ensure provision of the positive environmental externalities. These Members hold that, for them
to achieve their objectives regarding non-trade concerns such as the protection of the environment,
they also need an appropriate level of border protection as a flanking instrument.

(c)     Further Liberalization of Market Access and the Protection of the Environment

22.      While much has been made of environmental concerns being raised and discussed within the
context of the Green Box, some Members have also linked the ability to protect the environment to
further liberalisation of market access and reductions in support based on production. In this context,
some Members have noted that the existence of preferential market access has made available
additional export earnings (which would not have otherwise been available) to preference receiving
countries and thereby providing these countries with a greater level of income with which to help
protect the environment. On the other hand, others have stated that preferences in favour of some
Members mean discrimination against others. It has also been noted that improved non-
discriminatory market access, particularly for products of interest to developing countries, would not
only provide developing countries with the ability to increase income levels, but would also help to
improve investment levels, infrastructure and production processes. All of this, they argue, would
help to improve and protect the environment.

23.      Other countries have, however, noted that with already low levels of market access protection
and vulnerable agricultural sectors, further liberalisation particularly at a rapid pace, would put further
strain on their already fragile eco-systems as farmers may increase production in ways that may not be
environmentally sustainable.

3.      Specific Proposals and Discussions Related to the Environment

Green Box - Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture: Paragraphs 2 and 12

24.     With respect to how environmental policies should actually be dealt with in the negotiations
and in the Agreement on Agriculture, the discussions on non-trade concerns, including environmental
concerns, have tended to fall under the domestic support umbrella, usually, the Green Box. Under the
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 6


Agreement on Agriculture, domestic support with no, or at most minimal, trade-distorting effects or
effects on production, can be provided by governments as they see fit, provided that the criteria
defining Green Box measures are complied with. These criteria are specified in Annex 2 of the
Agreement on Agriculture. For instance, Paragraph 12 of Annex 2 allows Members to provide direct
payments to producers under environmental or conservation programmes subject to certain
conditions. For example, such payments being part of a clearly-defined government programme and
being limited to the extra costs involved in complying with the programme. Furthermore, Paragraph 2
of Annex 2 also covers support for research in connection with environmental programmes.

25.     Several specific proposals have been made concerning environmental policies under
Paragraph 12 of Annex 2 which are reflected in the Draft Possible Modalities on Agriculture. The
proposed amendments set out in the document are intended to cover programmes in developing
countries that are designed to address environmental concerns and to ensure that support provided
under environmental programmes in developed countries is not related to the volume of production.

4.        Possible Benefits for the Environment and Contribution to Sustainable Development

26.     Throughout the negotiations on agriculture, environmental issues have been part of the
discussions on non-trade concerns. While Members generally share the view that the protection of the
environment is a legitimate policy objective, there continue to be differences in views about the
appropriate instruments to achieve this objective. A number of Members consider that targeted,
transparent and non, or no more than minimally, trade-distorting measures are the effective tools.
Many of them see the reduction of trade-distorting support and border protection as having an overall
positive effect on the environment. Some other Members argue that they need some trade-distorting
support and border protection to achieve their non-trade objectives, including the protection of the
environment. There is, however, broad consensus that the environmental-related provisions of the
Green Box should be maintained.

B.        NEGOTIATIONS ON MARKET ACCESS11

1.        Status of the Negotiations

27.     The Negotiating Group on Market Access (NGMA) began its work in July 2002 after
addressing some procedural issues. The NGMA took note of the broad support in the CTE Special
Session (CTESS) for the idea that negotiations on environmental goods, as foreseen in
Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Declaration, be conducted in the NGMA for Non-Agricultural
Products.12 As a result, this topic has been discussed in the context of the NAMA negotiations and
many references have been made to it by Members in their submissions.

28.  On a practical level, coordination between the CTESS and the NGMA has been good. At an
NGMA meeting that took place on 12-13 September 2002, it was agreed that: (i) the Chairperson, on

          11
             Paragraph 16 of the Doha Declaration: "We agree to negotiations which shall aim, by modalities to be agreed,
to reduce or as appropriate eliminate tariffs, including the reduction or elimination of tariff peaks, high tariffs, and tariff
escalation, as well as non-tariff barriers, in particular on products of export interest to developing countries. Product
coverage shall be comprehensive and without a priori exclusions. The negotiations shall take fully into account the special
needs and interests of developing and least-developed country participants, including through less than full reciprocity in
reduction commitments, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Article XXVIII bis of GATT 1994 and the provisions
cited in Paragraph 50 below. To this end, the modalities to be agreed will include appropriate studies and capacity-building
measures to assist least-developed countries to participate effectively in the negotiations."

          Paragraph 31 (iii) of the Doha Declaration: "With a view to enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and
environment, we agree to negotiations, without prejudging their outcome, on: ...(iii) the reduction or, as appropriate,
elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services."
          12
             TN/TE/1, 12 April 2002
                                                                                                  WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                         Page 7


a more formalized basis, would keep the Chairperson of the CTESS informed of the ongoing
discussions in the NGMA concerning environmental goods. The Chairperson would in turn report to
the NGMA any information of relevance provided to him by the Chairperson of the CTESS; and,
(ii) papers relating to environmental issues submitted in the NGMA would also be submitted to the
CTESS to enhance transparency.13

29.     Discussions since 2003 led, on 1 August 2004, to an agreement on a "NAMA framework"
contained in Annex B of the General Council Decision on the Doha Work Programme 14. In its
decision, the General Council encouraged the NGMA to work closely with the CTESS with a view to
addressing the issue of non-agricultural environmental goods covered in Paragraph 31 (iii) of the
Doha Ministerial Declaration. Since then, the NGMA has met several times to discuss the broad
spectrum of elements in the NAMA framework, including the issue of environmental goods.15 While
a number of the initial submissions16 addressed the subject of environmental goods more generally,
including the definitional issue, some of the more recent submissions have instead focussed on
proposed lists of environmental goods.

30.     At an informal meeting that took place in July 2005, the NGMA Chair reported that the
CTESS was working on lists of environmental goods and that a stocktaking exercise would be
required at the appropriate time by the NGMA.

31.     At the Hong Kong Ministerial conference, Ministers took note of the report by the
Chairperson of the NGMA17, which states that: "Since the adoption of the July framework in 2004,
limited discussions have been held on this subject in the Group. However, it is noted that much work
under Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration has been undertaken by the Committee on
Trade and Environment in Special Session. There would need to be close coordination between the
two negotiating groups and a stock taking of the work undertaken in that Committee would be
required at the appropriate time by the NGMA."

32.      More recently, in a report to the TNC entitled "Towards NAMA modalities",18 the
Chairperson of the NGMA noted that there was no consensus on the subject of non-agricultural
environmental goods, beyond the existing mandate. Furthermore, as there had been no progress on
this issue at the time of the report, he suggested to transfer the July Framework language to the
modalities paper.

2.       Environment-related Aspects

(a)      Treatment of environmental goods

33.      One rather basic issue that has been discussed since the beginning of the NAMA negotiations
concerns the treatment (i.e. the tariff cutting modality) of environmental goods. At the beginning of
the discussions, some Members were of the view that since there would be a tariff cutting formula that
would apply across the board, environmental goods should not be the subject of special treatment.
That is, they should be treated in the same manner as other non-agricultural goods and subject to the
same modalities. However, some other Members viewed Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Declaration as


         13
            TN/MA/4
         14
            WT/L/579, Annex B (July Package)
         15
            Discussions concerning environmental goods took place on the informal meetings of 31 January – 4 February
2005, 14-18 March 2005 and 4-8 July 2005.
         16
            See Annex 1, List of documents submitted by Members referring to environmental goods in the context of the
NAMA negotiations.
         17
            TN/MA/16, 24 November 2005
         18
            TN/MA/W/80, 19 July 2006
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 8


providing for special treatment to environmental goods in the form of, for example, deeper cuts or
even tariff elimination.

34.      In 2006, three submissions dealing with the treatment of environmental goods were tabled to
the NGMA. The first one, tabled by a group of seven Members 19, proposed the elimination of tariffs
on these products no later than 2008 for developed countries and those developing countries declaring
themselves in a position to do so. Recognizing the need for flexibility, a longer implementation
period could be negotiated for developing countries, as well as the possibility to have exclusions for a
limited number of products. A second submission was tabled by the NAMA-11 group of developing
countries20. These Members took the view that the CTESS should continue and first finalise its work
before the NGMA can approach the issue of tariff treatment. Furthermore, they considered that an
important outcome of the negotiation should be to strengthen the environmental goods sector in
developing countries as a means of ensuring a win-win-win for the environment, development and
trade, and stressed the importance of S&D provisions in the form of longer implementation periods
and lower reductions, issues related to the transfer of technology and know-how, and NTBs. A third
document, which was previously circulated in the CTESS, was submitted by Argentina.21 This
Member proposed an "integrated approach" that would lead to the multilateral identification of
categories of environmental projects and "environmental goods" that could be included in those
projects. Tariff reduction/elimination and the elimination of non-tariff barriers would be agreed
multilaterally, taking account of special and differential treatment. These reductions/eliminations
would take effect as of the time that the importing Member assigns, to a given national environmental
project, the goods required to meet the objectives of that project. The tariff benefit granted by the
importing Member would cover a specific period, i.e. the project implementation phase.

35.     The above-mentioned submission by a group of seven Members was introduced and briefly
discussed at the 12-16 June 2006 NGMA informal open-ended meeting. Some Members were of the
view that any initiative concerning a further liberalization of environmental goods (in addition to
formula cuts) would be tantamount to a sectoral negotiation and, therefore, participation therein
should be on a non-mandatory basis. However, other Members considered that the mandate in
Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration called for a higher degree of liberalization on
the environmental goods identified.

(b)      Definition of environmental goods

36.     Different suggestions have been put forward regarding the criteria to be used for defining
environmental goods. While some Members have supported the need to define environmental goods
and produce a list, others have expressed the view that a definitional exercise is not required.
Furthermore, some Members consider that a list of environmental goods is not a necessary outcome of
the negotiations and that other approaches are possible.

37.     In discussions that took place in 2005, there appeared to be an understanding that it would be
the responsibility of the CTESS to define a list of environmental goods, while it would be the
NGMA's responsibility to determine the tariff and non-tariff treatment of such goods. Some Members
expressed the view that it would not be possible for the NGMA to make progress without advancing
the work in the CTESS.




         19
             TN/MA/W/70, Canada, European Communities, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland and the United
States, 9 May 2006
          20
             JOB(06)/194 from Argentina, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Namibia,
Philippines, South Africa and Tunisia.
          21
             TN/MA/W/77, 26 June 2006
                                                                                                      WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                             Page 9


38.     A 2006 submission by a group of seven Members22 noted that the product coverage for
environmental goods would need to be determined. It should be as comprehensive as possible and
based upon the work undertaken in the Committee on Trade and Environment in Special Session
(CTESS). Furthermore, given the evolving nature of environmental goods, product coverage should
be reviewed and updated over time to ensure that WTO Members have access to the best available
technologies to protect the environment and promote sustainable development. It was also noted that
work in the CTESS to identify environmental goods was difficult without an indication of what the
eventual modalities would be, and how special and differential treatment would apply.

(c)       Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs)

39.     On the work concerning NTBs, although some of the measures which have been notified may
be indirectly related to environmental measures and regulations, only a few have made an explicit
reference to them.23 Furthermore, in most of these cases the notifying Member indicated its intent to
address the concern either bilaterally or in the context of the WTO regular bodies.24

40.      As to the NTBs affecting the trade on non-agricultural environmental goods, the above-
mentioned submission by a group of seven Members (see paragraph 38) noted that, while reducing the
cost of these products through the elimination of tariffs is an important means of making
environmental goods more affordable and widely available, NTBs can be equally or even more
significant impediments to trade in such goods. For this reason, they proposed that specifically
identified barriers on these products (including any time-consuming and burdensome customs
formalities) should also be addressed and reduced to the maximum extent. Similarly, the NAMA-11
considered crucial to address NTBs on environmental goods and issues relating to the transfer of
technology and know-how, in particular on non-agricultural environmental goods.25 Argentina made
a reference to the reduction/elimination of NTBs as part of the proposed integrated approach. 26 As a
final remark, it should however be noted that no reference has been put forward beyond the
recognition of the general importance of the issue.

3.        Specific Proposals and Discussions Related to the Environment

41.      Since the beginning of the negotiations, many Members have submitted proposals dealing
with environmental goods.27 In the initial phase of the work in this area, following a proposal by the
Chairperson, the NGMA agreed that the Secretariat circulate the OECD and APEC lists of
environmental goods.28 While some Members considered that these lists were a good starting-point
for discussions, others were of the view that they should only be considered as contributions or useful
inputs, but not as the basis for discussions on this issue.

42.     In 2002, 2003 and 2005, lists of non-agricultural environmental goods were tabled by Japan,
Qatar, Chinese Taipei, Korea and the United States, as well as two lists from the EC designed to

          22
               TN/MA/W/70, Canada, European Communities, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland and the United
States.
          23
             Some of the NTB notifications made an express reference to problems faced with environmental regulations and
standards. For example, Egypt made reference to problems faced with environmental standards and environmental related
prohibitions (see TN/MA/W/46); India made reference to the imposition of voluntary international standards by buyers on
their suppliers in exporting countries (see TN/MA/W/46/Add.4); and Japan noted that the EC's system for the registration of
new and existing chemicals (REACH) could impose a higher burden on importers than on the manufacturers within the EU
member states (see TN/MA/W/46/Add.7).
          24
             See JOB(04)/62/Rev.7. For a general overview of the treatment of non-tariff measures, in particular those
affecting LDC exports, see document WT/COMTD/LDC/W/39.
          25
             See JOB(06)/194
          26
             See TN/MA/W/77
          27
             See Annex 1.
          28
             TN/MA/S/7, 30 October 2002
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 10


provide examples of the categories and types of products that may be considered in these
negotiations.29 At the request of the NGMA, the Secretariat generated trade statistics on Japan's list of
environmental goods in order to give an indication of the trade flows on these products.30 It should
however be noted that a large number of the products in Japan's list were identified by ex-outs of HS
six-digit tariff lines and that the Secretariat could only generate statistics at the six-digit HS tariff line
level. As a result, the statistics for many of these products were overestimated.

43.     During 2004, the efforts of the NGMA focussed on the preparations of the NAMA framework
as contained in Annex B of the General Council Decision on the Doha Work Programme of 1 August
2004, and no proposals were submitted by Members.

44.     During 2005, non-agricultural environmental goods issues were discussed on three occasions
and a submission by the United States entitled "Initial List of Environmental Goods"31 was received in
July 2005. The issue was also discussed in 2006 as part of the preparatory work for modalities, and
three further submissions were discussed. A brief summary of these discussions was included by the
Chairperson of the NGMA in his report to the TNC entitled "Towards NAMA modalities."32

4.        Possible Benefits for the Environment and Contribution to Sustainable Development

45.      A point made by certain Members has been that liberalisation in the sector of environmental
goods could result in a win-win-win situation for trade, the environment and development. However,
the point has also been made that given the high technological content of such products, one had to
avoid the situation of real trade benefits going only to the more advanced Members. The question of
easier access to environmental technology has also been raised.

C.        NEGOTIATIONS ON WTO RULES33

1.        Status of the Negotiations

46.     The most explicitly environmental issue encompassed within the mandate for the negotiations
on Rules is that of fishery subsidies: ("...In the context of these negotiations, participants shall also
aim to clarify and improve WTO disciplines on fisheries subsidies, taking into account the importance
of this sector to developing countries. We note that fisheries subsidies are also referred to in
Paragraph 31.") While the focus of the fishery subsidies mandate is subsidy disciplines, the reference
to "Paragraph 31" of the Ministerial Declaration is a recognition of the environmental aspects of this
issue as well (Paragraph 31 being in the section of the Declaration concerning trade and the
environment). Thus, while the fishery subsidies negotiations are concentrating on disciplining

          29
              It should be noted that other lists by Canada, New Zealand and Switzerland were tabled in the CTESS
          30
              TN/MA/S/8, dated 2 December 2002, and more detailed statistics have been posted on Members' website.
           31
              TN/MA/W/18/Add.7, 4 July 2005
           32
              TN/MA/W/80, 19 July 2006
           33
               Paragraph 28 of the Doha Declaration: "In the light of experience and of the increasing application of these
instruments by Members, we agree to negotiations aimed at clarifying and improving disciplines under the Agreements on
Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 and on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, while preserving the basic
concepts, principles and effectiveness of these Agreements and their instruments and objectives, and taking into account the
needs of developing and least-developed participants. In the initial phase of the negotiations, participants will indicate the
provisions, including disciplines on trade distorting practices, that they seek to clarify and improve in the subsequent phase.
In the context of these negotiations, participants shall also aim to clarify and improve WTO disciplines on fisheries
subsidies, taking into account the importance of this sector to developing countries. We note that fisheries subsidies are also
referred to in Paragraph 31."

           Paragraph 31 of the Doha Declaration: "With a view to enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and
environment, we agree to negotiations, without prejudging their outcome, on: ...We note that fisheries subsidies form part of
the negotiations provided for in Paragraph 28."
                                                                                                         WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                               Page 11


subsidies, the mandate also takes note of the environmental aspects of the fisheries subsidies issue.
Furthermore, certain other potentially environment-related issues were flagged early in the
negotiations, although to date these have not been developed.

2.        Environment-related Aspects

(a)       Fishery Subsidies34

47.      The issue of fishery subsidies was originally raised in the CTE some years ago. Beginning
with that debate, the demandeurs have consistently maintained that this issue has trade, environmental
and development aspects, all of which should be addressed by new, enhanced, subsidy disciplines.
On the other side of this debate, certain participants have questioned the relevance of environmental
concerns in the context of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ("the SCM
Agreement"), as well as the link between subsidies and environmental damage to fisheries, pointing in
this regard to inadequate fisheries management. These participants have at times taken the position
that any inadequacies in the SCM Agreement should be addressed on a horizontal basis rather than
sectorally, to avoid fragmentation of subsidies disciplines.

(b)       Other Environment-related Issues

(i)       Polluter pays principle and non-actionable subsidies

48.     During the Uruguay Round, certain environment-related provisions were introduced into the
SCM Agreement, although on a provisional basis. In particular, in something of a deviation from the
"polluter pays" principle, certain subsidies for adaptations to new environmental standards were
defined as non-actionable. This provision, along with the other non-actionable subsidy provisions,
lapsed at the end of 1999, due to the absence of a consensus among Members to extend them.
Proposals to revive the non-actionable category in one form or another (including reinstating this
category as it was) were tabled early in the negotiations. However, to date, this issue has not been
actively pursued.

(ii)      Environmental NGOs

49.      It remains possible that other environmental issues could be raised during the subsidy
negotiations, although to date this has not happened. In this regard, there is increased pressure from
NGOs to bring environmental issues into WTO disputes concerning subsidy and countervailing
issues, as well as increased activity among certain environmental NGOs in respect of environmental
effects of various forms of subsidies, and in respect of general subsidy issues in the DDA. These
views from civil society could eventually find their way into the negotiating positions of certain
participants.

3.        Specific Proposals and Discussions Related to the Environment

Fishery Subsidies

50.     In the Rules negotiations, the main environmental damage attributed by the demandeurs to
fishery subsidies, via the fostering of overcapacity and over fishing, is the depletion of world fish
stocks. The demandeurs have cited estimates of subsidization at 20-25 per cent of total sectoral
revenues, and have argued that these subsidies not only finance overcapacity directly (e.g., through
subsidies for shipbuilding and for gear and equipment) but also by reducing the costs and risks of

          34
             The full list of fisheries subsidies-related documents submitted to date to the Negotiating Group on Rules is set
forth in Annex II to this paper.
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 12


investing in this sector (e.g., through income and price supports, insurance subsidies, operating cost
subsidies, etc.). The demandeurs also argue that fisheries subsidies cause trade distortion, in the form
of distorting access to the resource – the fish – but that this type of distortion is not reached by the
existing subsidy rules of the SCM Agreement. The demandeurs have proposed, as the most effective
way to tackle these problems, a broad ban on subsidies to the fisheries sector, with certain exceptions
(see below). Participants on the other side of the issue initially responded that if the current subsidy
disciplines are ineffective, a horizontally-applicable rather than sector-specific solution should be
found. More recently, the position of these participants has evolved to encompass proposals of their
own for possible new disciplines in this sector. In particular, these participants have submitted
proposals on subsidy disciplines that would, in their view, target the fisheries subsidies that have the
negative effects referred to, i.e., that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing. In this context, based
on their position that the existence of such effects will vary depending on the fisheries management
context in which a particular subsidy operates, they propose to condition any such disciplines on
management indicators. These participants disagree with a broad ban approach, and instead argue
that only certain, listed subsidies with the identified effects should be prohibited.

51.     Participants on all sides of the debate recognize the potentially positive environmental effects
of some kinds of fishery subsidies, such as certain subsidies for retiring obsolete fishing vessels,
research subsidies for sustainable use and renewal of fish stocks, subsidies for fisheries management
enforcement, and others. Participants generally agree that subsidies that do not harm fish stocks
should be outside the scope of any prohibition. There are differences of view as to whether such
subsidies should be actionable (potentially subject to countervailing measures and/or WTO dispute
settlement), or entirely non-actionable.

52.      Participants in the negotiations also generally recognize that many developing countries'
economies are heavily dependent on the fisheries sector, and that any new disciplines need to take
account of this sustainable development aspect of the issue. A number of proposals for differentiated
disciplines for developing country Members are under discussion. The range of these proposals
includes: exempting from new disciplines certain specified measures for/by developing country
Members (including subsidies to small-scale and artisanal fishing), longer transition periods and
actionability instead of prohibition for certain fisheries subsidies of developing country Members, and
full exemption from any new prohibitions for developing country Members.

53.      Differing views have been expressed in the negotiations as to which forum or fora offer the
most accurate, reliable information concerning the state of world fish stocks and the adequacy of
fisheries management. Organizations/fora referred to in this regard include the FAO, the OECD, the
UN, regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs), and others. Differing views also have
been expressed as to the extent to which any new disciplines should be conditional on or refer to such
information.

4.      Possible Benefits for the Environment and Contribution to Sustainable Development

54.      As noted above, for many participants, the current focus in the negotiations on identifying
new disciplines for fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing is a means
to simultaneously address the environmental as well as the commercial effects of these subsidies.
These participants believe that such disciplines will help to ensure the sustainability of fish stocks so
that all Members, including fishing-dependent developing Members, can have long-term access to a
reliable supply of fisheries resources.
                                                                                                      WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                            Page 13


D.       NEGOTIATIONS ON SERVICES35

1.       Status of the Negotiations
55.     The negotiations on trade in services began in January 2000, pursuant to Article XIX of the
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). This section of the Note focuses on the
negotiations related to the environmental services sector, where most of the environmental issues in
the services negotiations have arisen.

56.     In the course of the discussion on environmental services, a question was raised about the
reference, in Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, to environmental services and
whether it might affect work in the Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services. As he
indicated in his Report to the Trade Negotiations Committee,36 the then Chairperson of the Special
Session of the Council for Trade in Services, had consulted on this issue with the Chairpersons of the
negotiating bodies concerned, i.e. the Negotiating Group on Market Access and the Special Session of
the Committee on Trade and Environment. He noted that, in the Special Session of the Committee on
Trade and Environment, there was broad support for the idea that the negotiations on environmental
services be conducted as part of the overall services negotiations in the Special Session of the Council
for Trade in Services.37

2.       Environment-related Aspects
57.      In the Services Sectoral Classification List (doc. MTN.GNG/W/120) developed during the
Uruguay Round, and largely based on the United Nations Provisional Central Product Classification
(CPC), the environmental services sector includes: (A) sewage services (CPC 9401); (B) refuse
disposal services (CPC 9402); (C) sanitation and similar services (CPC 9403); and (D) other
environmental services. Although the "other" category does not refer to any CPC item, it presumably
includes the remaining elements of the CPC environmental services category, i.e. cleaning of exhaust
gases (CPC 9404), noise abatement services (CPC 9405), nature and landscape protection services
(CPC 9406), and other environmental protection services not included elsewhere (CPC 9409). This
List has been used by many Members in their schedules of specific commitments.

58.      To date, about 50 Members38 have undertaken specific commitments in at least one sub-sector
of the environmental services sector. As compared to other sectors, such as tourism, financial
services or telecommunications, liberalization bound under the GATS in environmental services
appears rather limited. However, one should remember that Members' policies may be more liberal in
practice than what is reflected in their schedules. A survey of Members' schedules shows that mode 1
is often unbound, in part because some Members consider it not technically feasible. Commitments
under mode 2 are liberal, reflecting a general trend across services sectors. Most commitments on
environmental services focus on mode 3, while commitments on mode 4 are limited to some
particular categories of services providers. Overall, few market access and national treatment

          35
             Paragraph 15 of the Doha Declaration: "The negotiations on trade in services shall be conducted with a view to
promoting the economic growth of all trading partners and the development of developing and least-developed countries. We
recognize the work already undertaken in the negotiations, initiated in January 2000 under Article XIX of the General
Agreement on Trade in Services, and the large number of proposals submitted by members on a wide range of sectors and
several horizontal issues, as well as on movement of natural persons. We reaffirm the Guidelines and Procedures for the
Negotiations adopted by the Council for Trade in Services on 28 March 2001 as the basis for continuing the negotiations,
with a view to achieving the objectives of the General Agreement on Trade in Services, as stipulated in the Preamble,
Article IV and Article XIX of that Agreement. Participants shall submit initial requests for specific commitments by
30 June 2002 and initial offers by 31 March 2003."
          36
             Statement of the Chairperson of the Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services to the Trade
Negotiations Committee, 22 March 2002, TN/S/1.
          37
             Statement by the Chairperson of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment to the Trade
Negotiations Committee, 22 March 2002, TN/TE/1.
          38
             The 15 EC member states counted as one.
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 14


limitations have been scheduled. However, the scope of the commitments is restricted in a number of
schedules by horizontal limitations and restrictive definitions of the activities covered.

3.       Specific Proposals and Discussions Related to the Environment

(a)      The Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services

59.     The negotiating proposals on environmental services generally share the premise that
increased liberalisation in environmental services could play a positive role to improve environmental
protection and human health, assuming that appropriate domestic regulatory instruments are in place,
and stress the potential for "win-win" situations, especially for developing countries.39 Some
Members are of the view that negotiations will have to take into account the different levels of
development of Members. Several Members have expressed their interest in new and improved
commitments on environmental services.

60.      Three main themes seem to emerge from the proposals and the ensuing debate in the Special
Session. Firstly, further liberalization is generally called for, in terms of both increased country
coverage and reduction of barriers to trade across all modes. Commercial presence is often singled
out as being the most important mode of supply and several proposals identify various market access
barriers affecting this mode (equity limitations, restrictions on legal form, unspecified economic needs
tests, monopolies, etc). Some Members also stressed the need for further liberalisation of mode 4,
and, to a lesser extent, modes 1 and 2. Secondly, some proposals raise regulatory issues, such as the
need for increased transparency, implementation of Article I:3(a) of the GATS and recognition of
environmentally-related professional qualifications acquired in the territory of another Member. The
United States explicitly indicated that liberalization in environmental services must not impair the
ability of governments to impose performance and quality controls on environmental services and to
otherwise ensure that services providers are fully qualified and carry out their tasks in an
environmentally-sound manner. Several Members shared the view that negotiations on environmental
services should not impair Members' ability to regulate. Thirdly, most proposals identify
classification as a significant issue for this sector and propose to improve the existing W/120 List.
The classification component of these proposals is under consideration in the Committee on Specific
Commitments (see below).

61.      In February 2005, a group of Members submitted a joint report on their informal discussions
on environmental services. The document centres around three broad groups of questions: the
cross-border provision of environmental services, the definition of consultancy services in the area of
environmental services, and issues related to the scheduling of commitments for environmental
infrastructure services.40 In June 2005, the OECD presented a paper on "Managing Request-Offer
Negotiations Under the GATS: The case of environmental services." The aim of this paper is "to
assist WTO Members in gaining a greater insight into the particular issues of importance in the
environmental services sector and how they might be approached in current request-offer negotiations
under the GATS."41


         39
             Written proposals on environmental services have been tabled by the United States (S/CSS/W/25), the European
Communities (S/CSS/W/38), Canada (S/CSS/W/51), Switzerland (S/CSS/W/76), Australia (S/C/W/112), Colombia
(S/CSS/W/121) and Cuba (S/CSS/W/142).
          40
              Communication from Australia, the European Communities, Japan, New Zealand, the Separate Customs
Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, and the United States, Joint report on informal discussion on
environmental services in the context of the DDA, TN/S/W/28, 11 February 2005. Hong Kong, China is also a sponsor of
this document.
          41
              See OECD, Managing Request-Offer Negotiations Under the GATS: The Case of Environmental Services,
OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No. 11, by M. Geloso-Grosso, TD/TC/WP(2004)8/FINAL, 15 February 2005 and
Council for Trade in Services – Special Session, Report of the Meeting Held on 27 and 30 June and 1 July 2005, Note by the
Secretariat, TN/S/M/15 + Corr. 1, 15 September 2005, Paragraphs 42 to 63.
                                                                                                         WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                               Page 15


62.     In his July 2005 report to the Trade Negotiations Committee, the Chairperson of the Special
Session of the Council for Trade in Services, included an Annex containing a summary, prepared
under his own responsibility, of the sectoral, modal, rules-related and other discussions held under the
review of progress. Concerning the negotiations on environmental services, the Chairperson noted
that

          "[t]wo delegations indicated their expectation for increased liberalization of
          environmental services. One explained that environmental services benefited both
          importer and exporter economies, and recalled that the Doha Declaration made a
          specific reference to the liberalization of these services as a means of benefiting both
          trade and environment. This delegation sought further commitments, particularly in
          mode 3, but also in modes 1 and 2, since these modes were relevant for advisory
          services and helped to transfer technical know-how."42

63.     An information note on environmental services, summarizing the main issues raised in the
negotiations, was circulated by the Secretariat on 26 September 2005.43

64.      Pursuant to Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, a group of Members
prepared a collective request on environmental services.44 At the meeting of the Special Session held
on 7 April 2006, the European Communities, as coordinator for environmental services, reported on
the collective request and the first plurilateral meeting as follows:

          "... the first plurilateral meeting had been held on 3 April to discuss the collective
          request, with the presence of the 11 co-sponsors and 22 recipients. Environmental
          services as well as environmental goods were singled out for liberalization in
          Paragraph 31 of the Doha Declaration. The collective request covered commitments
          across all environmental services sub-sectors but did not address water for human
          use. A brief overview of the collective request by the coordinator had been followed
          by exchanges of questions and answers on various elements of the request.
          Participants had described their existing commitments or offers. Some delegations
          had indicated further improvements that could be included in their upcoming offers.
          A few delegations had underlined that additional commitments would require
          legislative changes. The meeting had shown that many recipients would benefit from
          additional information to facilitate reflections and domestic consultations on possible
          new or improved commitments on environmental services. The co-sponsors intended
          to provide recipients with more detailed answers to certain questions highlighted
          during the meeting building on their experience with the scheduling of commitments
          in this sector."45

          42
              Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services, Report by the Chairman to the Trade Negotiations
Committee, TN/S/20, 11 July 2005.
          43
             Information Note by the Secretariat, Environmental Services, JOB(05)/209, 26 September 2005.
          44
             Paragraph 7 of Annex C of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration reads as follows: " In addition to bilateral
negotiations, we agree that the request-offer negotiations should also be pursued on a plurilateral basis in accordance with
the principles of the GATS and the Guidelines and Procedures for the Negotiations on Trade in Services. The results of such
negotiations shall be extended on an MFN basis. These negotiations would be organized in the following manner: (a) Any
Member or group of Members may present requests or collective requests to other Members in any specific sector or mode
of supply, identifying their objectives for the negotiations in that sector or mode of supply; (b) Members to whom such
requests have been made shall consider such requests in accordance with Paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article XIX of the GATS
and Paragraph 11 of the Guidelines and Procedures for the Negotiations on Trade in Services; and (c) Plurilateral
negotiations should be organised with a view to facilitating the participation of all Members, taking into account the limited
capacity of developing countries and smaller delegations to participate in such negotiations."

          45
             Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services, Report of the Meeting Held on 7 April 2006, Note by the
Secretariat, TN/S/M/19, para. 15.
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 16


(b)     The Committee on Specific Commitments (CSC)

65.     In the CSC, Members have been considering whether and how the environmental services
section contained in the Secretariat Services Classification List should be revised. A number of
delegations concur that the existing classification is obsolete because it does not account for how
business now operates.

66.      Work on a revised classification of environmental services is based on proposals by the
United States (S/CSS/W/25), the European Communities (S/CSS/W/38), Canada (S/CSS/W/51),
Switzerland (S/CSS/W/76), Australia (S/CSS/W/112), and Colombia (S/CSS/W/121).                      The
communication presented by the European Communities proposes the creation of seven sub-sectors
based on the environmental media (air, water, soil, waste, noise, etc.); this is intended to reflect the
way services providers tend to specialize and aims at ensuring a comprehensive coverage of the
industry. The communication presented by Switzerland is close to the EC proposal, except for water
distribution, which Switzerland has not included. Australia is in favour of broadening the current
classification and supports in principle the approach proposed by the EC. The United States supports
proposals that incorporate a core list of environmental services comprised primarily of the currently
classified environmental services sectors. Canada is in favour of liberalizing environmental services
as they are currently defined in W/120. Colombia considers it would be useful to establish a model
list incorporating new services not already included in W/120. No agreement has been reached so far
on a revised classification.

4.      Possible Benefits for the Environment and Contribution to Sustainable Development

67.      Many delegations noted that the environment industry had developed significantly since the
end of the Uruguay Round, due in particular to growing environmental awareness and increasingly
stringent environmental standards and regulations. Technology had evolved, gradually shifting from
an "end-of-the-pipe" approach to more prevention. A number of delegations stressed the potential for
"win-win" situations in this sector: liberalizing environmental services could help to improve
environmental protection and create trading opportunities and, thus, be beneficial for both importing
and exporting Members. Increased competition resulting from improved market access could lead to
innovation and better quality services; however, appropriate domestic environmental regulations and
policies must be in place. Members' right to regulate was of key importance to achieve environmental
and social policy objectives.

68.    Some delegations recalled that the Doha Declaration had reaffirmed the importance of the
"win-win" dimension of open trade and its relationship with environmental protection, human health
and economic development.

69.      Several delegations felt that the negotiations should advance trade liberalization in core
environmental services; barriers should be reduced to a minimum and country coverage increased.
Some Members were of the view that liberalization in this sector could be of particular benefit to
developing countries. For instance, commercial presence of foreign enterprises could contribute to
capital formation, technology transfer, and improvements in environmental and sanitary conditions.
Several delegations stressed that the level of development should be taken into account when
liberalizing this sector.

70.     Some delegations also noted that market opening was not the only way to solve
environmental problems, but that it could make a contribution. One delegation expressed doubts
whether a direct link existed between liberalization of environmental services and sustainable
development; market opening might not reduce costs for developing countries since trade in this
sector was dominated by large monopolies.
                                                                                                          WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                                Page 17

                                                                   46
E.        NEGOTIATIONS ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT

71.     The negotiations on trade and environment under Paragraph 31 takes place in the Special
Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTESS).

2.        Status of the Negotiations

(a)       Paragraph 31 (i)

72.     Since the early stages of the negotiations, two main approaches have been followed under
Paragraph 31(i), namely the identification of specific trade obligations (STOs) set out in MEAs; and a
broader and more conceptual discussion of the WTO-MEA relationship. In a preliminary phase of the
discussions, Members focused on some of the terms of the mandate such as "multilateral
environmental agreement" (MEA); "specific trade obligation" (STO); and "as among parties to the
MEA" etc. With respect to the definition of STO, Members have examined various types of trade
measures set out in a number of MEAs, and how these measures may qualify as STOs for the purpose
of the mandate. As a reference for this discussion, delegations had available to them the Secretariat
Note entitled "Matrix on Trade Measures Pursuant to Selected Multilateral Environmental
Agreements".47

73.     The identification of STOs set out in MEAs led subsequently to an exercise of sharing
national experiences in the negotiation and domestic implementation of STOs in MEAs. This has
entailed explaining how Members' domestic policy formulation process takes place in areas involving
a WTO-MEA interface, and how that process is reflected on the international plane.

74.      In July 2004, Members reaffirmed their commitment to make progress in negotiations on
trade and environment. At the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December 2005, Ministers have
instructed Members to intensify the negotiations, without prejudging their outcome, on all parts of
Paragraph 31 of the Doha Declaration to fulfill the mandate.


75.     At the July 2006 meeting, the CTESS reverted to Paragraph 31 (i) discussions following a
proposal by the European Communities which suggested an outcome under Paragraph 31(i) in the
form of a ministerial decision on trade and environment.48

(b)       Paragraph 31 (ii)

76.     The mandate of Paragraph 31(ii) has two main components, namely information exchange
between MEA Secretariats and the relevant WTO committees, and criteria for the granting of observer
status.

          46
               Paragraph 31 of the Doha Declaration: "With a view to enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and
environment, we agree to negotiations, without prejudging their outcome, on:
           (i) the relationship between existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in multilateral environmental
agreements (MEAs). The negotiations shall be limited in scope to the applicability of such existing WTO rules as among
parties to the MEA in question. The negotiations shall not prejudice the WTO rights of any Member that is not a party to the
MEA in question;
           (ii) procedures for regular information exchange between MEA Secretariats and the relevant WTO committees,
and the criteria for the granting of observer status;
           (iii) the reduction or, as appropriate, elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and
services.
           We note that fisheries subsidies form part of the negotiations provided for in paragraph 28."
          47
               TN/TE/S/5/Rev.l
          48
               TN/TE/W/68
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 18


77.      With regard to information exchange, a number of concrete elements have been put
forward since the beginning of the negotiations to improve or complement existing practices and
cooperation mechanisms. These suggestions and ideas for potential avenues were summarized in
document TN/TE/7 of July 2003, and include formalizing MEA Information Sessions in the CTE, and
organizing them on a regular basis; holding MEA Information Sessions on specific themes by
grouping the MEAs that share a common interest; organizing meetings with MEAs in other WTO
bodies, either together with the CTE or separately; organizing more systematically WTO parallel
events at MEA Meetings of Parties; organizing joint WTO, UNEP and MEA technical assistance and
capacity building projects; promoting the exchange of documents, while respecting confidential
information; creating avenues for information exchange between government representatives from
the trade and environment sides; and establishing an electronic database on trade and environment.

78.    A meeting of the CTESS held on 12 November 2002 was devoted to information exchange
with the Secretariats of six MEAs and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
(TN/TE/4).

79.     With regard to observer status, it has been suggested that the general criteria pertaining to
the granting of observer status to international intergovernmental organizations contained in Annex 3
of the Rules of Procedure of the General Council (document WT/L/161, dated 25 July 1996) could
provide a basis for discussing specific criteria for MEA observership.

80.     Since 2003, the CTESS has invited, on an ad hoc basis, the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) and six MEAs49, as well as the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD), the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to its meetings. This is without prejudice to
ongoing negotiations inter alia on Paragraph 31 (ii) within the CTESS and to the settlement of the
question of observer status in the TNC or the General Council.

81.      Several delegations drew attention to the links and potential synergies between Paragraphs
31(i) and (ii) of the negotiating mandate. Enhanced cooperation between the WTO and MEA
secretariats could contribute to improving both international and national coordination, and could
further contribute to conflict prevention between the trade and environment regimes. In this regard, it
has been suggested that an outcome under Paragraph 31(ii) could go some way in addressing the
mandate under Paragraph 31(i).

(c)      Paragraph 31 (iii)

82.     Different approaches to Paragraph 31(iii) negotiations have emerged from the submissions
made to date. In the initial phase of negotiations, discussions based on submissions by a number of
Members, revolved around the identification of environmental goods using different parameters and
categories of environmental goods. At present, the CTESS has before it nine lists of environmental
goods.50 The items included in the individual lists have been compiled in the Secretariat's Synthesis
of Submissions on Environmental Goods.51


         49
             The Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and their Disposal, the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC), the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals
and Pesticides in International Trade and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.
          50
             Canada (TN/TE/W/50/Rev.1), Chinese Taipei (TN/TE/W/44 and Corr.1), European Community (TN/TE/W/47
and Add.1), Korea (TN/TE/W/48), New Zealand (TN/TE/W/49/Rev.2), Qatar(TN/TE/W/24 and 33), Japan (TN/TE/W/17
and Corr.1), Switzerland (TN/TE/W/57 and Corr.1) and United States (TN/TE/W/52).
         51
              TN/TE/W/63
                                                                                                WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                      Page 19


83.     In 2005, an alternative approach to negotiations was proposed by India described as the
"Environmental Project Approach".52 Argentina came forward with a proposal for an "integrated
approach" to the negotiations, which combines some of the elements of the previous two
approaches.53 Furthermore, other delegations have made contributions that focused on developing
countries' interests in the negotiations.

84.     At the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference, Ministers have called upon Members to complete
the work expeditiously under Paragraph 31 (iii). The negotiations on this part of the mandate have
become more concrete and substantive since then. As a way of moving forward, the Committee held
technical discussions under Paragraph 31 (iii) from April to June 2006, which followed the
information exchange sessions organized in the latter half of 2005. Technical discussions have
highlighted the practical issues related to product coverage.

85.     Following the technical discussions held from April to June 2006, Canada and New Zealand
tabled revised lists of environmental goods in July 2006.54 Other proponents have also stated at the
July 2006 meeting that they were currently in the process of revising their lists in light of the
comments they had received during the technical discussions.


86.     Furthermore a group of Members55 have tabled a proposal setting out modalities for
environmental goods liberalization.56 Another Member has submitted a proposal focusing on how
special and differential treatment can be implemented in the context of Paragraph 31(iii)
negotiations57. Some Members have expressed the view that they considered the issue of modalities
to be contingent upon a determination of product coverage. In this context, some delegations have
drawn linkages with the work of other negotiating groups.

87.     Finally, Members have noted that there is some degree of overlap in the mandate of the
CTESS and those of other relevant negotiating groups. Delegations supported the idea that the
negotiations on market access for environmental goods and services be conducted in NAMA and in
the Council for Trade in Services Special Session (CTSSS) respectively, and that CTESS would
monitor developments in other negotiating groups under Paragraph 31 (iii). Consultations were held
in 2002 between the Chairs of the NGMA, the CTSSS and CTESS to avoid duplication of work under
Paragraph 31 (iii) mandate and to enhance information flow between the three negotiating bodies.

3.      Specific Proposals and Discussions

(a)     Paragraph 31 (i)

88.      Different views have emerged from the beginning of the discussions over the issue of an
outcome for negotiations under Paragraph 31(i). Proposals submitted by the European Communities
and Switzerland have addressed this particular issue, focusing, for instance, on the need to develop
certain "principles and parameters" to underpin the WTO-MEA relationship, such as the principles of
no hierarchy, mutual supportiveness and deference between the trade and environment regimes. The
delegations that have put forward these proposals are of the view that the WTO-MEA relationship
could be further clarified and improved to prevent future conflicts.58 Some support was expressed for
the proposed governance principles, particularly on the need to develop common approaches to address

        52
           TN/TE/W/51 and 54
        53
           TN/TE/W/62
        54
           TN/TE/W/46/Rev.1 and TN/TE/W/50/Rev.1
        55
           Canada, European Communities, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States.
        56
           TN/TE/W/65
        57
           TN/TE/W/69 by Cuba
        58
           TN/TE/W/1, TN/TE/W/4 and TN/TE/W/39
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 20


global environmental problems, avoiding unilateral action. However, the view was also expressed that
governance principles fell outside the paragraph 31 (i) mandate. Many delegations maintained that the
CTESS needed to continue to build a firm, factual and analytical foundation to support any result
reached on this part of the mandate.

89.     Several delegations indicated that the mandate was more limited in scope, and did not extend
to the general WTO-MEA relationship. In their view, the mandate is circumscribed to a specific
aspect of this relationship, as it focuses on existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in
MEAs. Furthermore, the mandate clearly states that the negotiations are limited in scope to the
applicability of WTO rules as among parties to the MEA, and shall not prejudice the WTO rights of
any Member that is not a party to the MEA.

90.     On the different components of the mandate, the proposals and related discussions have
revolved around the terms "MEAs," "STOs," and the notion of measures being "set out in MEAs."
On "MEAs," while some believe that there is a need to define the concept so as not to overstep the
boundaries of the mandate, others do not view this as necessary. Some focus was placed on six
MEAs that could contain STOs. On "STOs," several delegations believe that these must be measures
which are explicitly provided for and mandatory under MEAs. Furthermore, some delegations have
argued that the entire operational framework of MEAs needs to be looked at in identifying the STOs
that are "set out in MEAs," suggesting that Conference of Parties (COP) decisions should be
addressed.59

91.      Moreover, Members discussed the issue of national coordination in the negotiation and
implementation of MEAs, mainly in relation to submissions from the United States, Australia and
Hong Kong, China.60 The submissions addressed the issue of national coordination, transparency, and
accountability in the negotiation and implementation of MEAs. They        also    emphasized      the
importance of national and international coordination between trade and environmental experts, and
identified a number of features in the design and implementation of STOs that contribute to their
effective operation. Addressed in the discussion were, amongst other issues, the mechanisms
established by various WTO Members for coordination between different governmental bodies; the
processes through which conflicting views were reconciled; the way in which stakeholders were
consulted; and the development of MEA implementing legislation. It has been argued in this context
that information on coordination and information exchange at the national level could provide insight
into measures for ensuring coherence between trade and environmental policies at the international
level. Furthermore, a call was made for principles of good governance to be extracted from the
national experience sharing, so that the factors that have prevented WTO-MEA conflicts from arising
thus far could be identified.

92.      In the discussions, Members held different views on the scope of Paragraph 31(i). Some
delegations consider that the mandate provides an opportunity to further clarify and improve the
relationship between WTO and MEA rules with a view to preventing conflicts from arising. For other
delegations the WTO-MEA relationship has proved to be working well, and the experience to date
does not support the need for further clarification to ensure the mutual supportiveness of the trade and
environment regimes. These delegations consider that the sharing of national experiences in the
negotiation and implementation of specific trade obligations in MEAs undertaken by some Members
could provide a basis for taking the discussions forward under Paragraph 31(i).



         59
            TN/TE/W/2 by Argentina; TN/TE/W/7 by Australia; TN/TE/W/10-13 by Japan, Chinese Taipei, New Zealand,
and Korea respectively; TN/TE/W/20-23 by United States, Switzerland, Canada and India respectively; TN/TE/W/26 by
Japan; TN/TE/W/28 by Hong Kong, China; TN/TE/W/29 by Malaysia; and TN/TE/W/31 by European Communities. For
a complete list of Proposals under Paragraph 31 (i), see Annex III.
         60
            TN/TE/W/40 and TN/TE/W/45 and TN/TE/W/28
                                                                                             WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                   Page 21


93.      At the July 2006 meeting, the CTESS considered a further proposal by the EC which
suggested an outcome under Paragraph 31(i) in the form of a ministerial decision on trade and
environment. This submission proposed, inter alia, to establish core principles to govern the
relationship between MEAs and WTO rules, and also set out procedures to guide WTO bodies and
dispute settlement panels in their consideration of environmental issues.61 A number of delegations
raised questions as to whether the proposal was within the scope of the mandate, which they noted
was circumscribed to the relationship between existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set
out in MEAs. Several delegations noted that they wished to study in more detail the legal
implications of such a proposal in light of rules and procedures under existing WTO agreements.

(b)     Paragraph 31 (ii)

94.     With respect to information exchange, the proposals tabled by Members have explored how
existing practices can be complemented or further improved upon by other forms of cooperation. It
has been suggested that some of the existing mechanisms already in place to facilitate information
exchange between the WTO, UNEP and MEAs could be formalized or further consolidated.62
Delegations had available to them a note by the Secretariat entitled "Existing Forms of Cooperation
and Information Exchange between UNEP/MEAs and the WTO".63 A number of delegations
suggested that the ideas developed by the CTESS on how to further MEA-WTO Secretariat
cooperation and information exchange (contained in document TN/TE/7) be explored in greater detail.

95.      Suggestions have also been put forward regarding the granting of observer status to MEA
secretariats in relevant WTO committees. References have been made in the discussions to the
overall situation on observer status in the General Council. At the same time, some delegations have
suggested indicative questions or criteria that could guide WTO committees in their consideration of
requests for observer status from MEAs. It was suggested that these could build on existing criteria
for the granting of observer status to international intergovernmental organizations. While several
delegations have argued that the outcome of the General Council and TNC deliberations on this
matter must be awaited, others have stated that the CTESS has an important role to play. For them,
the mandate was only designed to deal with environmental issues and called for a de-linking of this
part of the mandate from the broader question of observer status in WTO. At the 6-7 July 2006
meeting, Members discussed a new submission by the European Community under Paragraph 31(ii),
which proposed to make information exchange between WTO and MEA secretariats a formal,
institutionalized feature of WTO work, and which also set out general conditions to facilitate the
granting of observer status to MEAs in the CTE as well as in other WTO committees.64

(c)     Paragraph 31 (iii)

96.     Several submissions made by delegations have been discussed in the Committee, following
different approaches. Some delegations have identified specific products that they would like to be
considered in the context of the negotiations. In total, nine lists of environmental goods have been
submitted by delegations, and are now before the Committee.65

97.      An alternative approach, referred to as the "environmental project approach" was proposed by
India.66 Under this approach, Members would identify, at the national level, the environmental goods
        61
             TN/TE/W/68
        62
             TN/TE/5 by United States, TN/TE/W/15 by European Community and TN/TE/W/30 by Switzerland
        63
           TN/TE/S/2/Rev.1
        64
           TN/TE/W/66
        65
             Canada (TN/TE/W/50/Rev.1), Chinese Taipei (TN/TE/W/44 and Corr.1), European Community (TN/TE/W/47
and Add.1), Korea (TN/TE/W/48), New Zealand (TN/TE/W/49/Rev.2), Qatar(TN/TE/W/24 and 33), Japan (TN/TE/W/17
and Corr.1), Switzerland (TN/TE/W/57 and Corr.1) and United States (TN/TE/W/52).
         66
            TN/TE/W/51 and 54
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 22


and services that they wish to liberalize for the purpose of environmental projects. Such projects,
aimed at meeting national environmental objectives, would be subject to approval by a Designated
National Authority (DNA). The goods and services included in the approved project would qualify
for specified concessions for the duration of the project. The broad criteria for selecting these
"environmental projects" could be agreed upon in the CTESS.

98.     An "Integrated Approach" was presented by Argentina in an attempt to reconcile elements
from the previous two approaches.67 In order to benefit from liberalization under Paragraph 31(iii),
the goods would have to be included in one of the environmental project categories to be identified by
the CTESS. The application of tariff and non-tariff concessions granted by the importing Member
would cover the period of project implementation.

99.       Some Members have also advanced ideas on the possible structure of an environmental goods
list by suggesting the development of a "living list" that could be updated in future to incorporate new
products, so as to reflect the reality of the evolution of environmental goods as well as technological
change.68 Another proposal discussed suggested the creation of two lists, a core and a complementary
list, involving different sets of commitments.69

100.     A number of developing country Members have emphasized the need to pursue the
consideration of alternative approaches to the lists to address the mandate. Some further explanation
was provided at the July 2006 meeting on the environmental project approach, based on a further
submission on the subject by India.70 New ideas were also put forward by developing country
Members on criteria that could guide discussions on product coverage for environmental goods.
Several developing country participants indicated that they were net importers of environmental
goods, and that the mandate would need to address their objectives as well, including on technology
transfer and on their enhanced international competitiveness.

101.    In the context of the technical discussions held from April to June 2006, Members have
engaged in an examination of the wide range of products put forward as environmental goods. This
process has allowed for a more focused debate on the potential environmental and developmental
benefits of these products. Questions were raised regarding the application of different parameters to
some of the products within the relevant categories, and how such parameters could help define the
scope of environmental goods. It was noted that the parameters applied in the examination of
products and systems may not always reflect the environmental and developmental priorities of all
Members. The parameters used in the discussion included "single environmental end-use", "clear
environmental use or benefit", "predominant environmental end-use" and "otherwise environmentally
beneficial". The discussions have revealed that a majority of the products proposed have dual or
multiple uses. Several delegations reiterated their concerns regarding the designation of multiple use
products as environmental goods.

102.     Some Members have also referred in the course of Paragraph 31 (iii) discussions to the cross-
cutting issues of non-tariff barriers, transfer of technology and the linkage of environmental goods to
services as important questions to address in the context of these discussions.

103.   Moreover, a number of specific questions were raised with regard to classification under the
Harmonized System and the use of ex outs to identify goods that may qualify as environmental for the
purpose of the negotiations. It was noted that many of the products that could potentially qualify as
environmental goods were not described at the 6-digit level under the HS and could therefore require

        67
           TN/TE/W/62
        68
           For instance, by New Zealand (TN/TE/W/49)
        69
           TN/TE/W/38 by US
        70
           TN/TE/W/60
                                                                                      WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                            Page 23


the use of a narrower product description or ex-out. Some of the difficulties highlighted related to the
fact that the HS was not based on the criterion of end-use. Classification issues were also raised with
respect to products traded as part of a system or an entire plant. Following the technical discussions
revised lists were presented by Canada and New Zealand.71

4.      Possible Benefits for the Environment and Contribution to Sustainable Development

104.    The fulfillment of the mandate under Paragraph 31 (i) and (ii) would enhance mutual
supportiveness of trade and the environment. Reaching a balanced result to negotiations under
Paragraph 31 (iii) mandate would be a triple-win outcome that could deliver benefits from the
perspectives of trade, the environment and development.



                                             _______________




        71
             TN/TE/W/50/Rev.1 and TN/TE/W/46/Rev.1
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 24


                                           ANNEX 1

        Documents Submitted by Members Containing a Reference to Environmental Goods
                           in the Context of the NAMA Negotiations

    Participant        Document Symbol                    Title                         Date
European             TN/MA/W/1              Market     Access     for     Non-      24 June 2002
Communities                                 Agricultural products
United States        TN/MA/W/3              Negotiations on Environmental            3 July 2002
                                            Goods
Japan                TN/MA/W/5              Market     Access     for     Non-      5 August 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Korea                TN/MA/W/6              Market     Access     for     Non-      5 August 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Korea                TN/MA/W/6/Add.1        Market     Access     for     Non-     7 January 2003
                                            Agricultural products
Norway               TN/MA/W/7              Market     Access     for     Non-    4 September 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Singapore            TN/MA/W/8              Market     Access     for     Non-    10 September 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Canada               TN/MA/W/9              Market     Access     for     Non-     15 October 2002
                                            Agricultural products
India                TN/MA/W/10             Market     Access     for     Non-     22 October 2002
                                            Agricultural products
India                TN/MA/W/10/Add.1       Market     Access     for     Non-     8 January 2003
                                            Agricultural products
European             TN/MA/W/11             Market     Access     for     Non-     31 October 2002
Communities                                 Agricultural products
European             TN/MA/W/11/Add.2       Market     Access     for     Non-      1 April 2003
Communities                                 Agricultural products
Mexico               TN/MA/W/13             Market     Access     for     Non-    12 November 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Japan                TN/MA/W/15 + Corr.1    Market     Access     for     Non-    20 November 2002
                     TN/TE/W/17             Agricultural products
Switzerland          TN/MA/W/16             Market     Access     for     Non-    28 November 2002
                                            Agricultural products
Chile                TN/MA/W/17             Market     Access     for     Non-    2 December 2002
                                            Agricultural products
United States        TN/MA/W/18/Add.4       Liberalizing       Environmental        19 June 2003
                     TN/TE/W/34             Goods in the WTO: Approaching
                                            the Definition Issue- Paragraph
                                            31 (iii)
United States        TN/MA/W/18/Add.5       Market     Access     for     Non-      07 July 2003
                     TN/TE/W/38             Agricultural    products:      U.S.
                                            Contribution on an Environmental
                                            Goods Modality - Addendum
United States        TN/MA/W/18/Add.7       Market     Access     for     Non-       4 July 2005
                     TN/TE/W/52             Agricultural products: Initial list
                                            of environmental goods
MERCOSUR             TN/MA/W/23             Market     Access     for     Non-     15 January 2003
                                            Agricultural products
Qatar                TN/MA/W/24 + Corr.1    Negotiations on environmental          28 January 2003
                     TN/TE/W/19 + Corr.1    goods: efficient, lower-carbon
                                            and pollutant-emitting fuels and
                                            technologies – Paragraph (iii)
                                                                                            WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                                  Page 25



    Participant           Document Symbol                          Title                         Date
Thailand                 TN/MA/W/26                  Market     Access     for   Non-     17 February 2003
                                                     Agricultural products
Ghana;     Kenya;        TN/MA/W/27                  Market     Access     for   Non-     18 February 2003
Nigeria; Tanzania;                                   Agricultural products
Uganda; Zambia and
Zimbabwe
Bolivia                  TN/MA/W/28                  Negotiating group on market          28 February 2003
                                                     access     for   Non-Agricultural
                                                     products
Qatar                    TN/MA/W/33                  Harmonized       System     (HS)       25 April 2003
                         TN/TE/W/27                  Classification Codes Of Gas-
                                                     Related Goods - Paragraph 31 (iii)
Ghana;       Kenya;      TN/MA/W/40                  Market      Access    for  Non-       11 August 2003
Madagascar;                                          Agricultural products – Joint
Mauritius; Nigeria;                                  statement on Draft Elements of
Rwanda; Tanzania;                                    Modalities for Negotiations on
Tunisia;    Uganda;                                  Market      Access    for  Non-
Zambia          and                                  Agricultural Products
Zimbabwe
Turkey                   TN/MA/W/41                  Market     Access     for Non-        12 August 2003
                                                     Agricultural products
Canada,      European    TN/MA/W/70                  Market Access for Environmental         9 May 2006
Communities, New         TN/TE/W/65                  Goods
Zealand,      Norway,
Singapore,
Switzerland       and
United States
Argentina,               JOB(06)/194                 Market     Access     for  Non-        19 June 2006
Bolivarian Republic                                  Agricultural      products    –
of Venezuela, Brazil,                                Comments by the NAMA 11
Egypt,          India,                               Group of Developing Countries
Indonesia, Namibia,
Philippines,    South
Africa and Tunisia
Argentina                TN/MA/W/77                  Integrated    Proposal          on     26 June 2006
                         (Circulated previously as   Environmental    Goods         for
                         TN/TE/W/62)                 Development

  List of Documents Prepared by the Secretariat on Environmental Goods in the context of the
                            Negotiating Group on Market Access

        Document Symbol                              Title                                Date
TN/MA/7                                Committee      on    Trade    and             21 February 2003
WT/CTE/GEN/9                           Environment - Negotiating Group
                                       on Market Access - Environmental
                                       Aspects of the Negotiations on
                                       Market Access - Statement by Mrs.
                                       Carmen Luz Guarda at the Regular
                                       Session of the Committee on Trade
                                       and Environment of 14 February
                                       2003
TN/MA/S/6                              List of environmental goods                    7 October 2002
TN/MA/S/8                              Trade in environmental goods                  2 December 2002
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 26


                                         ANNEX II

       Fisheries Subsidies Proposals Submitted by Participants within the Framework
                             of the Negotiating Group on Rules

                                        (2002-2006)



        Participant                       Proposal                      Symbol

 Australia, Chile, Ecuador,
Iceland, New Zealand, Peru,    The Doha Mandate to Address
                                                                       TN/RL/W/3
 Philippines, and the United    Fisheries Subsidies: Issues
           States

                                  Proposal from People's
           China               Republic of China on Fisheries          TN/RL/W/9
                                         Subsidies

                                  Japan's Basic Position on
           Japan                                                      TN/RL/W/11
                                  Fisheries Subsidies Issue

                               Fisheries Subsidies-Limitations
       New Zealand                  of Existing Subsidies             TN/RL/W/12
                                         Disciplines

                                 Korea's Views on the Doha
                                   Development Agenda
           Korea                                                      TN/RL/W/17
                                  Discussions on Fisheries
                                         Subsidies

                                     Adverse Trade and
       United States               Conservation Effects of            TN/RL/W/21
                                    Fisheries Subsidies

                                   Japan's Contribution to
           Japan                   Discussion on Fisheries            TN/RL/W/52
                                       Subsidies Issue

 Argentina, Chile, Iceland,
                                  Subsidies in the Fisheries
 New Zealand, Norway, and                                             TN/RL/W/58
                               Sector: Possible Categorisations
           Peru

                                   Korea’s Views on the
           Korea                Suggested Categorization of           TN/RL/W/69
                                    Fishery Subsidies

                                   Possible Approaches to
       United States              Improved Disciplines on             TN/RL/W/77
                                     Fisheries Subsidies
                                                                       WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                             Page 27



         Participant                      Proposal                  Symbol

                                 Submission of the European
   European Communities
                                Communities to the Negotiating
                                                                  TN/RL/W/82
                                  Group on Rules- Fisheries
                                         Subsidies

                                   Questions from Japan
           Japan                  Concerning Papers on the        TN/RL/W/84
                                  Fisheries Subsidies Issue

                                 Comments from the People's
                                  Republic of China on the
           China                  United States Proposal on       TN/RL/W88
                                    Fisheries Subsidies
                                       (TN/RL/W/77)

                                    Possible Approaches to
           Chile                   Improved disciplines on        TN/RL/W115
                                      Fisheries Subsidies
Antigua and Barbuda, Belize,
  Fiji Islands, Guyana, the
Maldives, Papua New Guinea,           Fisheries Subsidies         TN/RL/W/136
Solomon Islands, St Kitts and
            Nevis
                                     Fisheries Subsidies:
        New Zealand                   Overcapacity and            TN/RL/W154
                                      Overexploitation

                                 Fisheries Subsidies: Proposed
           Japan                                                  TN/RL/W159
                                  Structure of the Discussion

                                Questions and Comments from
                                   Korea on New Zealand's
           Korea                                                  TN/RL/W/160
                                 Communication on Fisheries
                                  Subsidies (TN/RL/W/154)

                                  Fisheries Subsidies: UNEP
                                    Workshop on Fisheries
        New Zealand                                               TN/RL/W/161
                                  Subsidies and Sustainable
                                    Fisheries Management

           Japan                Proposal on Fisheries Subsidies   TN/RL/W/164

 Argentina, Chile, Ecuador,
    New Zealand, Peru,                Fisheries Subsidies         TN/RL/W/166
        Philippines
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 28



         Participant                          Proposal                   Symbol

                                       Additional views on the
        United States                  structure of the fisheries      TN/RL/W/169
                                        subsidies negotiations

   Japan; Korea; and the         Contribution to the Discussion
Separate Customs Territory         on the Framework for the
                                                                       TN/RL/W/172
of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen         Disciplines on the Fisheries
        and Matsu                          Subsidies

                                 Contribution to the Discussion
                                    on the Framework for
           Brazil                                                      TN/RL/W/176
                                   Disciplines on Fisheries
                                           Subsidies

   European Communities                  Fisheries Subsidies           TN/RL/W/178

                                        Fisheries Subsidies to
        New Zealand                                                   TN/RL/GEN/36
                                        Management Services
                                 IV.       Paper on Fisheries
   European Communities                                               TN/RL/GEN/39

                                 Fisheries Subsidies: Programs
        United States               for Decommissioning of            TN/RL/GEN/41
                                 Vessels and License Retirement

                                   IUU Fishing And Fisheries
           Japan                                                      TN/RL/GEN/47
                                           Subsidies

                                 Contribution to the Discussion
 Australia, Ecuador & New           on the Framework for
                                                                      TN/RL/GEN/54
          Zealand                  Disciplines on Fisheries
                                   Subsidies - Aquaculture

                                 Contribution to the Discussion
                                    on the Framework for
           Brazil                                                     TN/RL/GEN/56
                                   Disciplines on Fisheries
                                           Subsidies

    Antigua & Barbuda,
   Barbados, Dominican
  Republic, Fiji; Grenada,          WTO Fisheries Subsidies
Guyana, Jamaica; Papua New        Disciplines – Architecture on     TN/RL/GEN/57/Rev.2
Guinea; St. Kitts & Nevis, St.   Fisheries Subsidies Disciplines
 Lucia, Solomon Islands, and
     Trinidad & Tobago
                                                                                 WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                       Page 29


                                          ANNEX III

              Proposals Submitted by Participants under Paragraph 31 Negotiations

A.    PARAGRAPH 31 (GENERAL)

  Symbol              Date                                Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/39       24 March 2004    The Relationship between WTO Rules and MEAs in the Context
                                  of the Global Governance System - Submission by the
                                  European Communities – Paragraph 31

B.    PARAGRAPH 31 (I)

  Symbol              Date                                 Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/1        21 March 2002    Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs):
                                  Implementation of the Doha Development Agenda – Submission
                                  by the European Communities
TN/TE/W/2        23 May 2002      Mandate Under Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration on
                                  Trade and Environment - Submission by Argentina
TN/TE/W/3 -      3 June 2002      Sustainability Impact Assessment - Submission by the
WT/COMTD/                         European Communities
W/99 -
WT/CTE/W/
208
TN/TE/W/4        6 June 2002      Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs):
                                  Implementation of the Doha Development Agenda - Submission
                                  by Switzerland
TN/TE/W/7        7 June 2002      Suggested Procedure for the Negotiations under Paragraph 31(i)
                                  of the Doha Declaration - Submission by Australia
TN/TE/W/9 -      17 Sept. 2002    Energy Taxation, Subsidies and Incentives in OECD Countries
WT/CTE/W/                         and their Economic and Trade Implications on Developing
215                               Countries, in Particular Developing Oil Producing and Exporting
                                  Countries - Submission by Saudi Arabia
TN/TE/W/10       2 Oct. 2002      The Relationship between Existing WTO Rules and Specific
                                  Trade Obligations Set Out in Multilateral Environmental
                                  Agreements (MEAs) - Submission by Japan
TN/TE/W/11       2 Oct. 2002      Contribution on Paragraph 31(1) of the Doha Ministerial
                                  Declaration - Submission by the Separate Customs Territory
                                  of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu
TN/TE/W/12       3 Oct. 2002      Negotiations under Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Ministerial
                                  Declaration - Submission by New Zealand
TN/TE/W/13       8 Oct. 2002      Specific Trade Obligations (STOs) - Submission by the
                                  Republic of Korea
TN/TE/W/16       5 Nov. 2002      Statement by Switzerland at the CTE Special Session
                                  on 10 October 2002
TN/TE/W/20       10 Feb. 2003     Sub-Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration - Submission by
                                  the United States
TN/TE/W/21       10 Feb. 2003     Meeting of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and
                                  Environment, 12-13 February 2003 – Submission by
                                  Switzerland
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 30


  Symbol            Date                                  Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/22     10 Feb. 2003    Discussion Paper on the Concept of Specific Trade Obligations
                               (STOs) - Submission by Canada
TN/TE/W/23     20 Feb. 2003    Relationship between Specific Trade Obligations Set Out in
                               MEAs and WTO Rules - Submission by India
TN/TE/W/24     20 Feb. 2003    Statement by Hong Kong, China at the meeting of the
                               Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment of
                               12-13 February 2003
TN/TE/W/25     20 Feb. 2003    Contribution by Norway based on its intervention at the
                               Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment
                               of 12-13 February 2003
TN/TE/W/26     25 April 2003   The Relationship between WTO Rules and Specific Trade
                               Obligations Set Out in MEAs - Submission by Japan
TN/TE/W/26/    5 June 2005     The Relationship between WTO Rules and Specific Trade
Corr.1                         Obligations Set Out in MEAs – Submission by Japan –
                               Corrigendum
TN/TE/W/28     30 April 2003   Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration - Specific Trade
                               Obligations - Set Out in Multilateral Environmental Agreements
                               - Implementation of Cites in Hong Kong, China - Submission by
                               Hong Kong, China
TN/TE/W/29     30 April 2003   Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration -
                               Submission by Malaysia
TN/TE/W/31     14 May 2003     The Relationship between MEAs and WTO Agreements: “Set
                               Out in MEAs” - Submission by the European Communities
TN/TE/W/32     13 May 2003     Statement by Switzerland at the Meeting of the Special Session
                               of the Committee on Trade and Environment of 1-2 May 2003
TN/TE/W/35     27 June 2003    Identification of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
                               (MEAs) and Specific Trade Obligations (STOS) - Submission
                               by China

TN/TE/W/35/    3 July 2003     Identification of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
Rev.1                          (MEAs) and Specific Trade Obligations (STOS) - Submission
                               by China - Revision
TN/TE/W/36     3 July 2003     The Relationship between WTO Rules and “Specific Trade
                               Obligations Set Out in MEAs” - Submission by the Separate
                               Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu
TN/TE/W/37     7 July 2003     APEC Trade and Environment Workshop - 19-20 May 2003,
                               Bangkok - Submission by Australia
TN/TE/W/40     21 June 2004    Sub-Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration - Submission by
                               the United States
TN/TE/W/41     18 June 2004    Comments on "The Relationship Between WTO Rules and MEAs
                               in the Context of the Global Governance System "(TN/TE/W/39)
                               Submission by the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan,
                               Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu
TN/TE/W/43     25 Aug. 2004    The Relationship between Existing WTO Rules and Specific
                               Trade Obligations (STOS) Set Out in Multilateral Environmental
                               Agreements (MEAS) - Statement by Colombia in the Committee
                               on Trade and Environment Special Session at its Meeting of
                               22 June 2004
TN/TE/W/45     12 Oct. 2004    Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration -Australia’s experience
                               - Submission by Australia
                                                                               WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                     Page 31


  Symbol             Date                                 Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/53     4 July 2005       Putting MEA/WTO Governance into Practice: the EC’s
                                 Experience in the Negotiation and Implementation of MEAs –
                                 Submission by the European Communities
TN/TE/W/58     6 July 2005       The Relationship between Existing WTO Rules and Specific
                                 Trade Obligations (STOs) Set Out in Multilateral Environmental
                                 Agreements (MEAs): a Swiss Perspective on National
                                 Experiences and Criteria Used in the Negotiation and
                                 Implementation of MEAS - Submission by Switzerland
TN/TE/W/61     10 October 2005   The Relationship between WTO Rules and MEAS - Submission
                                 by Switzerland
TN/TE/W/68     30 June 2006      Proposal for a Decision of the Ministerial Conference on Trade
                                 and Environment - Submission by the European Communities

C.     PARAGRAPH 31 (II)

  Symbol             Date                                 Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/5      6 June 2002       Contribution of the United States on paragraph 31(ii) of the
                                 Doha Ministerial Declaration
TN/TE/W/15     17 Oct. 2002      MEAs: Information Exchange and Observer Status –
                                 Submission by the European Communities
TN/TE/W/30     30 April 2003     Information Exchange and Observer Status - Submission by
                                 Switzerland
TN/TE/W/66     15 May 2006       Continued Work under Paragraph 31(ii) of the Doha Declaration
                                 – Submission by the European Communities

D.     PARAGRAPH 31 (III)


     Symbol          Date                                Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/6       6 June 2002      Environmental Goods - Submission by New Zealand
TN/TE/W/8       9 July 2002      Negotiations on Environmental Goods - Submission by the
                                 United States
TN/TE/W/14      9 Oct. 2002      Environmental Goods - Submission by the State of Qatar
TN/TE/W/17      20 Nov. 2002     Market Access for Non-Agricultural Products - Submission by
                                 Japan
TN/TE/W/17/     25 Nov.2002      Market Access for Non-Agricultural Products - Submission by
Corr.1                           Japan
TN/TE/W/19      28 Jan. 2003     Negotiations on Environmental Goods: Efficient, Lower-
TN/MA/W/24                       Carbon and Pollutant-Emitting Fuels and Technologies -
                                 Submission by the State of Qatar
TN/TE/W/19/     21 Feb. 2003     Negotiations on Environmental Goods: Efficient, Lower-
Corr.1                           Carbon and Pollutant-Emitting Fuels and Technologies -
TN/MA/W/24/                      Submission by the State of Qatar - Corrigendum
Corr.1
TN/TE/W/27      25 April 2003    Harmonized System (HS) Classification Codes of Gas-Related
TN/MA/W/33                       Goods - Submission by the State of Qatar
TN/TE/W/33      21 May 2003      OECD Joint Working Party on Trade and Environment:
WT/CTE/W/                        Environmental Goods: A Comparison of the APEC and OECD
228                              lists - Information Note by the OECD Secretariat
WT/CTE/W/243
Page 32



   Symbol          Date                                Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/34     19 June 2003   Liberalizing Environmental Goods in the WTO: Approaching
TN/MA/W/18/                   the Definition Issue - Submission by the United States
Add.4
TN/TE/W/38     7 July 2003    United States Contribution on an Environmental Goods
TN/MA/W/                      Modality
18/Add.5
TN/TE/W/42     6 July 2004    Statement by China on Environmental Goods at the Committee
                              on Trade and Environment Special Session (CTESS) Meeting of
                              22 June 2004
TN/TE/W/44     7 Oct. 2004    Proposed Initial List of Environmental Goods - Submission by
                              the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen,
                              and Matsu
TN/TE/W/44/    3 Dec. 2004    Proposed Initial List of Environmental Goods - Submission by
Corr.1                        the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen,
                              and Matsu - Corrigendum

TN/TE/W/46     10 February    Environmental Goods - Submission by New Zealand
               2005

TN/TE/W/47     17 February    Market Access for Environmental Goods - Communication from
               2005           the European Communities

TN/TE/W/47/    27 June 2005   Market Access for Environmental Goods - Communication from
Add.1                         the European Communities – Addendum

TN/TE/W/48     18 February    Initial List of Environmental Goods Proposed - Submission by
               2005           the Republic of Korea

TN/TE/W/49     26 May 2005    Environmental Goods - Submission by New Zealand

TN/TE/W/49/    16 June 2005   Environmental Goods - Submission by New Zealand - Statement
Suppl.1                       by New Zealand at the CTESS Informal Meeting
                              of 10 June 2005 – Supplement
TN/TE/W/49/    12 October     Revised New Zealand Provisional List of Environmental Goods
Rev.1          2005           - Submission by New Zealand – Revision

TN/TE/W/50     2 June 2005    Canada's Initial List of Environmental Goods - Submission by
                              Canada
TN/TE/W/50/    1 July 2005    Canada's Initial List of Environmental Goods - Submission by
Suppl.1                       Canada - Statement by Canada at the CTESS Informal Meeting
                              of 10 June 2005 – Supplement
TN/TE/W/51     3 June 2005    An Alternative Approach for Negotiations under
                              Paragraph 31(iii) - Submission by India

TN/TE/W/52     4 July 2005    Initial List of Environmental Goods - Submission by the
                              United States
                                                                            WT/CTE/W/243
                                                                                  Page 33



   Symbol         Date                               Subject/Title
TN/TE/W/54    4 July 2005    Structural Dimensions of the Environmental Project Approach -
                             Submission by India

TN/TE/W/55    5 July 2005    Environmental Goods - Communication from the Republic of
                             Cuba

TN/TE/W/56    5 July 2005    EC Submission on Environmental Goods - Submission by the
                             European Communities

TN/TE/W/57    6 July 2005    Environmental Goods – Submission by Switzerland


TN/TE/W/57/   14 September   Environmental Goods - Submission by Switzerland –
Corr.1        2005           Corrigendum

TN/TE/W/59    8 July 2005    Environmental Goods for Development - Submission by Brazil


TN/TE/W/60    19 September   Procedural and Technical Aspects of the Environmental Project
              2005           Approach – Submission by India

TN/TE/W/62    14 October     Integrated Proposal on Environmental Goods for Development -
              2005           Submission by Argentina
TN/TE/W/64    20 February    Continued Work Under Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha
              2006           Declaration - Submission by the United States
TN/MA/W/70    9 May 2006     Market Access for Environmental Goods - Communication from
TN/TE/W/65                   Canada, European Communities, New Zealand, Norway,
                             Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States
TN/TE/W/67    13 June 2006   Environmental Project Approach: Compatibility and Criteria -
                             Submission by India
TN/TE/W/69    30 June 2006   The Development Dimension as an Integral Part of the
                             Negotiations on Environmental Goods: the Principle of Special
                             and Differential Treatment - Communication from the Republic
                             of Cuba



                                    __________

								
To top