PRESS RELEASE
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT BULLETIN
PRESS/TE/039
27 June 2002
(02-3589)
COMMITTEE MEETINGS: 11-12 AND 13-14 JUNE 2002
Members continue Doha mandated environment discussions
The second meeting of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) was
held on 11–12 June, under the Chairmanship of Ambassador Yolande Biké (Gabon), followed by
the meeting of the CTE, on 13-14 June, under the Chairmanship of Ambassador O ğuz Demiralp
(Turkey).
The WTO Secretariat, under its own responsibility, has prepared this Bulletin on the June meetings
of the CTE and its Special Session.  Papers referred to in this Bulletin can be accessed through the
WTO Web site ( http://docsonline.wto.org/ ), and are available from the Trade and Environment
Division of the WTO Secretariat.  An upda ted list of CTE documents from January 1995 to
September 2001 can be found in WT/CTE/INF/4.
Next meetings:  CTE on 8–9 October;  CTE Special Session on 10–11 October.
For several years, the WTO Secretariat has been organizing regional seminars on trade and
environment with Government representatives from trade and environment Ministries indeveloping countries and economies in transition with the participation of UNEP, UNCTAD and
MEAs.
The WTO Secretariat has also begun to organize side-events at MEA meetings to increase the level
of understanding of the links between WTO rules and specific trade-related environmental issues.
See the attached Annex for further information.
Committee on Trade and Environment Special Session
11 –12 June 2002
General
The second meeting of the CTE Special Session took place from 11-12 June 2002 under the
Chairmanship of Ambassador Yolande Biké of the Re public of Gabon.  Two procedural issues were
resolved.  On phases of work , it was agreed that the Special Session would start with a
preparatory period in which participants would examine the concepts contained in paragraph 31 of
the Doha Ministerial Declaration.  However, it would not divide its work into rigid phases.  On the
number of meetings  to be held in 2002, it was agreed to hold a total of four meetings, the fourthPRESS/TE/039
Page 2 of 8
devoted to an Information Session with MEAs and UNEP.1  The Session would address paragraph
31(ii) of the mandate on "procedures for regular information exchange between MEA Secretariatsand the relevant WTO Committees, and the criteria for the granting of observer status."
The following 13 MEAs would be invited to participate:• The Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their
Disposal (Basel Convention);
• the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Biosafety Protocol;
• the Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR);
• the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES);
• the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT);
• the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF);
• the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO);
• the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol);
• the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure for Certain
Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade;
• the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs);
• the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS);
• the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); and
• the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UN Fish Stocks).
Paragraph 31(i) – WTO rules and specific trade obligations in MEAs
Several new documents were presented under this item, including:  (1) TN/TE/S/1 by the WTO
Secretariat, entitled MEAs and WTO Rules; Proposals Made in the CTE from 1995-2002 ;
(2) TN/TE/W/2 by Argentina;  (3) TN/TE/W/4 by Switzerland;  and (4) TN/TE/W/7 by Australia.The EC had also circulated a document under this item at the March meeting, TN/TE/W/1.  The
Swiss paper spoke of the principles of no hierar chy, and mutual supportiveness and deference that
should govern the WTO-MEA relationship.  It suggested the adoption of an interpretative decisionto clarify the relationship between MEAs and WTO rules.  However, a number of delegations felt it
was premature to propose solutions since the preparatory phase had barely started.
The Argentinian paper spoke of the need to develop a common understanding of the terms "MEAs"
and "specific trade obligations", as well as to examine the exact nature of the relationship between
WTO rules and the specific trade obligations contained in MEAs.  It set out certain criteria identifiedby the Appellate Body to determine the relationship between different legal provisions dealing with
the same subject, arguing that these could guide the work of the Special Session.  A number of
delegations commented on the paper, and welcomed it as a first attempt to define the conceptscontained in the mandate.  The criterion that MEAs should be agreemen ts that have already
entered into force, drew particular attention, wi th many delegations enquiring what would be done
with MEAs that came into effect after the conclusion of the negotiations.
The Australian paper suggested a th ree-phased approach for the work of the Special Session.  A
first phase would be devoted to identifying the specific trade obligations in MEAs and the WTO
rules that were relevant to them;  a second phase to determine whether there had been particular
implementation problems with respect to these trade obligations; and a third phase to discuss
matters arising from the work undertaken in the first two phases.  The Australian approachreceived support from several delegations.  A number of delegations argued, however, that it
                                               
1 The date of this fourth meeting has not yet been fixed .PRESS/TE/039
Page 3 of 8
could be combined with a definitional exercise to determine what constituted an MEA and a specific
trade obligation.
General statements were made about the importance of not prejudging the outcome of
negotiations under this item, the importance of identifying problems prior to negotiating solutions,and of bearing in mind the limitations that had been placed by Ministers on the negotiating
mandate.  A number of delegations argued that technical assistance and capacity building would
be crucial for their effective participation in the negotiations.
Paragraph 31(ii) – Information exchange and criteria for observer status
Two new documents were circulated under this item:  (1) TN/TE/S/2 by the WTO Secretariat,entitled  Existing Mechanism for Cooperation and Information Exchange between UNEP/MEAs and
the WTO ;  and (2) TN/TE/W/5 by the US.  The US paper stressed the importance of greater
coordination between trade and environment officials at the national level, the need for greater
information and documents exchange, and for setting criteria for the granting of observer status toMEAs in WTO bodies.  A number of delegations commented on the importance of cooperation
between the WTO, UNEP and MEAs.  They welcomed existing cooperation in the MEA Information
Sessions in the CTE, the UNEP/WTO cooperation arrangement, the Regional Trade andEnvironment Seminars organized by WTO in wh ich UNEP and MEAs participated, and other
activities.  Many spoke of the need to consolidate existing practices, and to see how cooperation
could be enhanced.  New Zealand pointed to the positive spillover that this mandate could have onparagraph 31(i) in terms of averting potential conflicts.
Paragraph 31(iii) – Environmental goods and services
New Zealand presented a document, TN/TE/W/6, on Environmental Goods , with the objective of
contributing to a discussion on the definition of environmental goods.  The paper was based on the
work conducted by APEC under its sectoral liberalization proposal on environment.  It was
welcomed by a number of delegations, who noted the extensive work that APEC had done on thesubject.  Reference was also made to the work carried out by the OECD in this area.  It was noted
that the liberalization of environmental goods did no t have to be based on a definitional exercise,
but could proceed based on Members' requests an d offers in the context of the market access
negotiations.
Other Issues
For the information of delegations in the CTE Special Session, the EC circulated a document,TN/TE/W/3, on Sustainability Impact Assessment.  Some delegations felt that the Special Session
was not the appropriate forum for such a document.
Committee on Trade and Environment
13 – 14 June 2002
The Committee on Trade and Environment met on 13–14 June 2002 under the Chairmanship of
Ambassador O ğuz Demiralp (Turkey).
MEA Information Session on technical assistance and capacity building
The Committee held an Information Session with Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
focusing on technical assistance, capacity building and enhancing information exchange on trade,
environment and sustainable development.  The WTO and the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) opened the Session by outlining their cooperative activities to increasePRESS/TE/039
Page 4 of 8
synergies, including the WTO Regional Seminars and the UNEP-UNCTAD Task Force on Capacity
Building on Trade, Environment and Development ( see WT/CTE/W/209).  The WTO noted its
intention to organize side-events at meetings of the Conference of the Parties of select MEAs on
trade-related aspects of relevance to those MEAs;  the first side-events were held at the second
session of the UN Forum on Forests in New York in February and at the sixth Conference of theParties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in The Hague in April.  The next ones are planned
for meetings of the Montreal Protocol and CITES later this year.  The Annex contains the schedule
of regional seminars and MEA side-events in 2002.
UNEP circulated its report on Enhancing Synergies and Mutual Supportiveness of MEAs and the
WTO (WT/CTE/W/213), and put forward suggestions for issues of focus, including:  assessment of
the impacts of trade liberalization on the environment and the realization of the objectives of
MEAs;  trade and economic implications of MEAs and the role of trade in sustainable development;
effectiveness of trade measures in achieving environmental objectives;  the role ofenvironmentally sound technologies in achieving environmental and trade objectives;  the role of
economic instruments in internalizing environmental costs and promoting trade;  and capacity
building to enable governments to develop integrated national policies on environment, trade anddevelopment, and engage effectively in WTO negotiations.  Exploring these issues should
contribute to developing an action-oriented agenda for the MEA Information Session in the CTE
Special Session in late 2002 .
The following Secretariats briefed the CTE on trade-related technical assistance in their respective
instruments:
• the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora;
• UNEP Chemicals (on the Rotterdam Prior Informed Consent and Stockholm Persistent Organic
Pollutants Conventions);
• the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change;
• the Convention on Biological Diversity;
• the Basel Convention on Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal;
• the International Tropical Timber Organization;
• the UN Forum on Forests;  and
• the UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (on the Convention on the Law of the
Sea and the Fish Stocks Agreement).
2
Members welcomed the presentations and reiterated  the importance of national coordination in
policy-making on trade and environment, in order to achieve the objectives in the Doha Ministerial
Declaration, as well as in MEAs.  There was an interactive exchange between Members and theMEA and UNEP Secretariats, which highlighted the challenges and opportunities ahead in
enhancing cooperation.  Information exchange, several delegations noted, was key to cooperation.
                                               
2 The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer;  the International
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, and the Commission for the Conservation ofAntarctic Marine Living Resources were unable to participate.PRESS/TE/039
Page 5 of 8
Paragraph 32(ii) of the Doha Declaration – the relevant provisions of the TRIPs
Agreement
The focus of this meeting was on paragraph 32(ii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, which
mandates the CTE to give particular attention to the relevant provisions of the Agreement on
Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs).  Members generally noted that the TRIPsAgreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) should be mutually supportive.
India, Brazil and Pakistan were among the Members who said that proposals to amend the TRIPs
Agreement to ensure harmonious implementation of both agreem ents were being put forward in
the TRIPs Council – where discussion on this issue should focus.
The United States requested that its related submissions to the TRIPs Council be circulated in the
CTE:  the first paper discusses provisions of the CBD related to access to genetic resources and
benefit sharing (IP/C/W/257);  the second describes the practices of the US National Cancer
Institute in collecting genetic material for screening for therapeutic uses related to cancer(IP/C/W/341).  Several delegations, including Switzerland and Canada, said this issue should be
left to the TRIPs Council and the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee.
The CBD Secretariat circulated a paper on its activities in relation to the relationship between the
TRIPs Agreement, the CBD and protection of traditional knowledge and folklore in WT/CTE/W/210-
IP/C/W/347/Add.1.  The CBD also referred to the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties(COP-6) in The Hague in April 2002, at which it was again noted that the provisions of the TRIPs
Agreement and the CBD were interrelated, and that this relationship was being examined by the
TRIPs Council in conformity with Article 19 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.
UNCTAD presented the Communiqué from its international seminar, convened with the
Government of India, on Systems for the Protection and Commercialization of Traditional
Knowledge  in New Delhi from 3 – 5 April 2002, in which participants expressed the need for
understanding the viability of various instruments including national sui generis  systems of
protection and their recognition at the international level (WT/CTE/W/214).  The papers from theseminar are available at http://www.unctad. org/trade_env .
Paragraph 32(i) of the Doha Declaration – market access and sectoral trade
liberalization
India presented a paper on the importance of market access for developing countries
(WT/CTE/W/207).  Many delegations expressed their interest in exploring the issues raised in
India's paper by identifying sector specific exam ples of market access impediments related to the
environment.  Brazil and Malaysia said it was essential to increase information dissemination of
environmental requirements to developing countries, particularly for small and medium-sized
enterprises.
The US said that India's suggestion to examine some real-world situations, such as the case of
jute, was constructive;  India's paper dealt with reconciling environmental protection and a non-discriminatory trading system so that both can be pursued in a mutually supportive way.  This was
the crux of the Doha Ministerial mandate.  Norw ay noted that environmental requirements could
have unintentional side effects, particularly for developing countries;  that was why technicalassistance and capacity building was important.
Canada, the US and others said that several concer ns laid out in India's paper could be addressed
through the TBT Agreement, such as transparency and equivalency of environmental
requirements.  Reference was made by several Members to the suggestions to increasePRESS/TE/039
Page 6 of 8
transparency in the EC submission on eco-labelling (WT/CTE/W/212-G/TBT/W/175 see below ).
Korea said that technical assistance, capacity building and technology transfer were vital to ensureparticipation in standards making processes.
Many Members reiterated the need to safeguard existing market access against unjustified
environment-related market access barriers.  Indonesia, Cuba, Djibouti, Pakistan and Venezuela
stressed that developing countries  required ample time to respond to environmental requirements
in export markets and longer compliance periods.  The EC noted the development of partnerships in
the context of the World Summit on Sustainable Development for sustainable trade centres to help
inform developing countries of environmental requirements in export markets.
The OECD noted that its Joint Working Party on  Trade and Environment had already begun work
examining the potential impacts on developing country exports of environmental measures and
had developed a series of such case studies.  The US said that these case studies should be sharedwith the broader WTO membership to determine potential areas for targeting assistance resources.
UNEP referred to its seminar with UNCTAD and the ACP Secretariat on improving opportunities for
organic agriculture products in Brussels in Febr uary 2002, in order to promote a dialogue between
exporters and importers.  UNCTAD called attent ion to its expert meeting on environmental
requirements and international trade planned for 2–4 October 2002.
Reference was also made to the following sectors where "win-win-win" outcomes could result from
removing trade restrictions and distortions.
Agriculture
Canada drew attention to the need to promote the positive, and mitigate the negative effects ofagriculture through policies that did not distort production and were not based on subsidies inorder to allow sustainable farming practices.  Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica and Djibouti
supported such "win-win-win" opportunities.
Energy
Saudi Arabia (an observer) made a presentation  on the energy sector and referred to the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations, highlighting the potential impacts of
policies and measures implemented by developed co untries, such as energy taxes.  Jordan, Kuwait
and Venezuela recalled the importance of this sector to discussions in the CTE.
Forestry
Japan contributed a paper highlighting relevant issues in the forestry sector (WT/CTE/W/211),which reinvigorated debate.  Korea noted that su stainable forest management was crucial to the
debate, as highlighted at the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF) and the International Tropical Timber
Organization (ITTO).  Malaysia, Brazil and others noted that punitive trade measures were not thefirst-best way to address illegal logging.  The US said Japan had raised key issues in this regard –
domestic actions were a critical starting-point in combatting illegal logging.  Norway, Djibouti and
Venezuela said that poverty was key to deforestation.  Given that illegal logging was an issuebeing addressed in other international fora, Canada suggested to focus on trade in illegally-
harvested forest products.  The ITTO recalled that a main concerns was conversion of forestland to
agricultural purposes.  CITES noted that certain endangered species, such as mahogany, wereincluded in Appendix III of CITES, and that a report on timber trade would be discussed at its
upcoming COP in Chile.  The UN Forum on Forests referred to its trade-related discussions.PRESS/TE/039
Page 7 of 8
Paragraph 32(iii) of the Doha Declaration – labelling requirements for
environmental purposes
The European Communities presented a paper on the way forward on eco-labelling, which was also
circulated and discussed at the meeting of the Technical Barriers to Trade Committee (TBT) on 20-
21 June (WT/CTE/W/212-G/TBT/W/174).  Members welcomed the EC contribution.  Canadarecalled its contribution to the TBT discussion on eco-labelling (G/TBT/W/174), which sought to
look at the issues from the perspective of im plementation of the TBT Agreement.  Japan and
Switzerland called for close cooperation between the CTE and the TBT Committee and fordeveloping country concerns to be taken into account.
Eco-labelling will be the focus of discussions at the 8-9 October meeting of the CTE.
Item 4 – Trade measures for environmental purposes and environment
measures with trade effects
The Secretariat circulated the WTO Enviro nmental Database for 2001, which contains
environment-related measures or provisions notified by Members (WT/CTE/EDB/1 and Corr.1).
Paragraph 33 of the Doha Declaration – technical assistance, capacity building
and environmental reviews of trade agreements
In the Doha Declaration, Ministers recognized the importance of technical assistance and capacity
building in the field of trade and the environment to developing countries, in particular the least-
developed, and encouraged the sharing of expertise and experience with Members wishing toperform national environmental reviews.  This sh aring of expertise on bo th aspects of paragraph
33 will better enable the CTE to prepare its report to the next WTO Ministerial in 2003.  Input from
other intergovernmental organizations is critical to addressing these issues.
Comments at this meeting focused on technical assistance and capacity building, with Members
expressing their appreciation for the MEA Info rmation Session on 13 June, which had focused on
this area.  The US, EC, Switzerland and others welcomed creative suggestions on technical
assistance activities, particularly to increase c oordination at the national level between trade and
environment officials.
UNCTAD and UNEP highlighted their plans to include trade-related environmental issues in their
joint activities in the Capacity Building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development.
The EC presented its work on Sustainability Impact Assessments (SIAs) in respect of work under
the Doha Development Agenda (WT/CTE/W/208-WT/COMTD/W/99-TN/TE/W/3).  Fulldocumentation is available at http://idpm.man.ac.uk/sia-trade .  Canada and the US welcomed
updates from Members who were undertaking environmental assessments.  Australia felt that the
pilot study of the EC was based on a misunderstanding of trade liberalization and its social andenvironmental outcomes;  trade liberalization and reform improved resource allocation with
consequent environmental benefits.
Paragraph 51 of the Doha Declaration
Members stressed the importance attached to paragraph 51, which sets out that the CTE and theWTO Committee on Trade and Development, within their respective mandates, shall identify and
debate the developmental and environmental aspe cts of the negotiations to help achieve the
objective of having sustainable development appropriately reflected.  It was decided to have a
general overview discussion at the 8–9 October meeting.PRESS/TE/039
Page 8 of 8
ANNEX
WTO Regional Seminars and Side-Events on Trade and Environment in 2002
In Paragraph 33 of the Doha Ministerial Declar ation, Ministers recognized the importance of
technical assistance and capacity building in the field of trade and the environment to developing
countries, in particular the least-developed countries.  For several years, the WTO Secretariat hasbeen organizing regional seminars on trade and environment for developing countries and
economies in transition, with the participation of UNEP, UNCTAD and MEAs.
The objective of these seminars is to raise awareness of the linkages between trade, environment
and sustainable development and to further enha nce the dialogue between trade and environment
policymakers in WTO Member Governments.  Issues of relevance to trade and environment andthe rules of the WTO, as well as specific concerns in each region are addressed.  National
delegations participating in these three-day seminars consist of officials from Ministries of either
Trade or Foreign Affairs (depending on the Ministry responsible for WTO issues), and fromMinistries of Environment.  Funding for the seminars is provided by the voluntary contributions of
WTO Member Governments in the WTO Global Trust Fund.
The WTO Secretariat has also begun to organize side-events at select MEA meetings.  These
events target developing country participants with the objective of increasing their level of
understanding of the links between WTO rules and specific trade-related environmental issues.The first such side-event was held at the Second Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests
in New York on 8 March 2002
Region Host
CountryLanguage Tentative
DatesCountries
Invited
Caribbean Saint Lucia English January 2002 13
UN Forum on Forests side-
eventUnited
StatesEnglish April 2002 open
South & Central America Colombia Spanish March 2002 18
Asia Singapore English May 2002 25
Africa Namibia English July 2002 24
Central & Eastern Europe Latvia English September 2002 25
Africa TBC French September 2002 23
Montreal Protocol side-event TBC English October 2002 open
UNFCCC COP-8 side-event TBC English October 2002 open
CITES COP-12 side-event TBC English November 2002 open
Pacific Fiji English November 2002 12
ENDS