WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/CTE/W/225
6 March 2003
(03-1291)
Committee on Trade and Environment Original:  English
LABELLING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSES
Submission by the European Communities under Paragraph 32(iii)
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Paragraph 32 (iii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration mandates the WTO Committee on
Trade and Environment (CTE) “ in pursuing work on all items on its agenda within its current terms of
reference, to give particular attention to labelling for environmental purposes ” and “ report to the
Fifth Session of the WTO Ministerial Conference, and make recommendations, where appropriate,
with respect to future action, including the desirability of negotiations. ” 1
2. This paper builds on the previous discussion in the CTE, the outcome of the World Summit
on Sustainable Development (WSSD), the existing international standard for environmental labelling
schemes developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the recent
submission on labelling by the EC to the Committee for Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and theCommittee for Trade and Environment (CTE).
2
3. The use of various types of environmental labelling schemes to promote environmental
objectives has increased considerably in recent years and the use of such schemes is no longer
confined solely to developed countries as developing countries have started to design such schemes
themselves.
4. Examples of developing countries that have developed voluntary eco-labelling schemes based
on life-cycle approach and are members of the Global Eco-labelling Network (GEN, for further
details and full list of members, see the attached Annex I) are Korea, China, India, Brazil, Thailand,
Indonesia and Malaysia. Moreover, Colombia and Sri Lanka are in the process of establishing their
own eco-labelling schemes. Furthermore, GEN has recently received inquiries on how to set up anEco-label scheme from Cuba, Malawi, Tunisia, Chile, Jamaica, Georgia, Nicaragua and Jordan.
5. This trend inevitably has consequences for international trade and it is important to ensure
that such schemes are prepared, adopted and applied in a transparent way that promotes the mutual
supportiveness of trade, environment and development objectives.
6. The Doha mandate covers different types of environmental labelling. This first EC
contribution to the debate focuses on governmental and non-governmental voluntary eco-labelling
schemes based on a life-cycle approach. It is clear that the discussion on voluntary eco-labelling
schemes shall not prejudge following discussions on other types of eco-labelling schemes, includingmandatory environmental labels, or in any way change the rights and obligations of WTO Members
on labelling in general.
                                                     
1 WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1. Ministerial Declaration. November 2001
2 G/TBT/W/175 and WT/CTE/W/212. Labelling; Submission by the EC. June 2002WT/CTE/W/225
Page 2
7. There are several reasons for this:
(a) Such schemes are market-based and generally represent the most trade-friendly
means to achieve environmental objectives.
(b) Such schemes have been the subject of long standing discussion in the CTE since
1995 and there has already been substantial work on the subject.
(c) The 1999 ISO standard 14024 has created an internationally agreed criteria for such
schemes.
(d) The recent WSSD has given strong support to the use of market based mechanisms in
promoting sustainable development.
8. In view of the above, it should be possible at least in this sub-part of the DDA Mandate for
the CTE discussion to make progress by the 5th WTO Ministerial in Cancun next September.
9. The discussion in the CTE should result in a higher degree of certainty for both those using
voluntary eco-labelling schemes and those seeking to ensure that such schemes do not create
unnecessary barriers to trade, but on the contrary operate as vehicles for enhanced market access by
even small producers in developing countries.
10. The discussion should fully take into account developing country concerns and should
identify means to help developing countries to reap the benefits from using such labels in their export
markets, to help them participate in relevant intern ational work as well as to help them prepare and
apply, as appropriate, such schemes.
11. The discussion should also take into account the varied nature of the operators of  voluntary
eco-labelling schemes. Such schemes are not only run by governmental bodies or large NGOs but also
by small organisations with limited capacity and very local reach. The small-scale of such
organisations as well as their private and non-profit character needs to be understood and respected.
II. BACKGROUND
12. Labelling for environmental purposes has been an important element of the CTE work. The
conclusions and recommendations of the CTE to the 1996 Singapore Ministerial Conference, stated
that “Well-designed eco-labelling schemes/programmes can be effective instruments of environmental
policy to encourage the development of an environmentally conscious public." 3
13. In the recent World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) WTO members, alongwith other UN members, debated and recognised the importance of consumer information related to
sustainable consumption. The Summit concluded in paragraph 14(e) of the Implementation Plan that
countries should take action to “Develop and adopt, where appropriate, on a voluntary basis,
effective, transparent, verifiable, non-misleading and non-discriminatory consumer information tools
to provide information relating to sustainable  production and consumption, including human health
and safety aspects. These tools should not be used as disguised trade barriers. ” 
4
13 bis. At the WSSD, WTO members – again, in their role as UN members - also called for all to
support voluntary market-based initiatives for the creation and expansion of markets forenvironmentally friendly goods and services, including organic products, and related technical
assistance. It is clear to the European Communitie s that the WTO can contribute to this objective by
                                                     
3 WT/CTE/1. Report (1996) of the Committee on Trade and Environment. November 1996
4 WSSD. Report of the WSSD. September 2002WT/CTE/W/225
Page 3
its work under paragraph 32 (iii). It is also clea r that DDA work on TRTA is relevant to this WSSD
conclusion. It is logical that WTO members should continue to support in the WTO what they have
called for at the WSSD.
14. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has developed standards for
environmental labelling in the ISO 14020 series. These standards contain guiding principles for the
development and use of certain types of environmental labels.
15. Labelling in general has been discussed in the WTO Committee for Technical Barriers to
Trade (TBT). The second triennial review of the TBT Agreement concluded “ that concerns regarding
labelling were raised frequently in the Committee meetings during discussion on the implementation
and operation of the Agreement. In this regard, the Committee reiterated the importance of any suchrequirements being consistent with the disciplines of the Agreement, and in particular stressed that
they should not become disguised restrictions on trade. ” 
5
16. Debate in the TBT Committee is on-going and the Community has supported the organisation
of an informal TBT Committee workshop on labelling that would be open to participants in otherWTO Committees, in particular, the Committee on Trade and Environment.
III. LABELLING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSES
17. Several types of labelling for environmental purposes can be identified. Each labelling type
has different structures of preparation, adoption and application and are being used in both developedand developing country WTO members.
18. Environmental-labelling schemes can be classifi ed according to their legal status (mandatory
versus  voluntary), according to the rule-setting body (governmental versus  non-governmental),
according to the review mechanisms for criteria (static versus  evolutionary), according to the
geographic scope (national versus  international) and finally according to whether they use or not
criteria based on non-product related process and production methods (product related PPMs versus
non-product related PPMs).
19. This paper emphasises that the above mentioned categories have very different degrees of
impact on international trade. Thus, for the discussion in the CTE, it is important to recognise these
differences, even though the discussion would initially concentrate on governmental and non-governmental voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on a life cycle approach, which can provide an
effective way to meet environmental objectives and as such would lessen the need to resort to other
less trade-friendly means to achieve such objectives.
20. However, in some cases the use of any type of environmental labelling schemes cannot
replace regulatory measures to achieve legitimate environmental objectives.
IV. ISO STANDARDS ON ENVIRONMENTAL LABELLING
21. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has developed standards for certain
types of environmental labelling in the ISO 14020 series. These standards contain guiding principlesfor their development and use.
22. The standards in the ISO 14020 series cover voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on life-
cycle analysis, self-declared environmental claims and qualified product information profiles.
                                                     
5 G/TBT/9. Second Triennial Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Agreement on
Technical Barriers to Trade. Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. November 2000WT/CTE/W/225
Page 4
23. Standard 14024 in the ISO series, which covers  voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on the
life-cycle approach, is relevant for the purposes of this paper. Voluntary eco-labelling schemes
covered by this standard are based on pre-set criteria developed by third parties, following extensive
consultation, to evaluate products environmental effects through its life-cycle. Examples of these are
the Nordic Swan  and the EU’s Flower  labels.
V. DEVELOPING COUNTRY NEEDS: MARKET ACCESS AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
24. By definition, voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on a life cycle approach do not deny
market access to a product. However, where such schemes exist, those products that use such schemes
can have important commercial advantages. For developing countries, effective participation in
related international work, particularly in the ISO work, and ability to translate that into their ownlabelling schemes is a challenge. The ability to qualify for such labels is also a challenge. This is not
only the case for trade between developed and developing countries but increasingly between
developing countries as well.
25. Properly designed and transparent eco-labelling schemes can facilitate market access for
developing countries. For instance, the EU eco-label has favoured the access to European niche
markets of a number of non-EU companies. Indeed, the EU eco-label was awarded to several non-EU
companies, including companies from Developing  Countries (China, Korea, South Africa, Hong
Kong/China, Ivory Coast). The instrument used by the EC to facilitate applications from companies
located in DCs is a special and reduced fee.
26. In trying to ensure that developing countries can reap a share of the potential benefits from
trade in products with such labels, WTO members should further consider technical assistance needs
to help developing countries to develop their own schemes and/or comply with eco-labelling schemes
in export markets. It should be noted that any technical assistance needs to be demand driven andmust be based on clearly identified needs. In order to promote coherence and convergence, such
assistance should be designed and carried out in co-ordination with relevant international
governmental and non-governmental organisatio ns such as GEN, ISO, UNCTAD, UNEP, WTO
TRTA, Capacity-Building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development etc.
27. The EC is already supporting Sustainable Trade Innovation Centers (STIC). This new global
partnership, presented at WSSD as a Type 2 initiative, is designed to help developing countryproducers integrate environmental factors into their export strategy. Because the main drivers of this
pressure to integrate environmental factors are business requirements from international buyers and
growing consumer demand, STIC will put emphasis on facilitating the dialogue on voluntary codes
between developing country producers and developed countries. Two initiatives will start soon: one
on textiles and another one on electronics eco-design.
VI. PROPOSED APPROACH
28. Based on the above, the EC believes that the CTE debate could focus usefully on the
following possible principles:
(a) The use of voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on a life-cycle approach
contributes to achieving environmental objectives in line with the outcome of the
WSSD.
(b) The use of such schemes should provide an opportunity for developing countries to
enter markets where environmental considerations are important and the WTO shouldtake steps to facilitate this, in line with the outcome of the WSSD.WT/CTE/W/225
Page 5
(c) The use of voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on a life-cycle approach  is
legitimate within the rights and obligations of the WTO Agreements. The use of
relevant international standards when preparing, adopting and applying such schemes
further ensures that such schemes do not become unnecessary barriers to international
trade.
(d) Further positive support is needed to enable developing country governments,
producer organisations and other relevant stakeholders to have the fullest possible
access to the definition and operation of such schemes. WTO members should
examine the possibility of notification or other appropriate means of consultation and
publicity for existing and new schemes.
(e) Those using such schemes should to the extent possible be encouraged to reflect the
principles of the TBT Code of Good Practice, including its objective of transparency,in their operations, and to keep their schemes under review.
29. To help developing countries apply and use such schemes and reap the benefits associated
with the markets for such products, the WTO members should:
(a) Agree to identify any related technical assistance needs in relation to compliance with
such schemes in export markets, partic ipation in relevant international work,
particularly in the ISO work, as well as in the preparation and application of
developing countries’ own schemes and in doing so take into account and not
duplicate any existing work in this field.
(b) Encourage all concerned actors to consider reduced fees for DCs to acquire such
labels where possible and consider funding in whole or in part the early years of
smaller exporters use of such schemes and thus favour their entrance to niche markets
in developed countries.
(c) Agree to support STICs in facilitating dialogue on voluntary codes between
developing country producers and developed countries.
(d) Agree to consider various tools to support co-operation between different schemes.
30. Based on discussion, the CTE should consider the means by which the CTE recommendations
and the 5
th Ministerial would advance these issues.WT/CTE/W/225
Page 6
ANNEX I
ECOLABELLING PROGRAMS THAT ARE MEMBERS OF GEN
Country / Jurisdiction Year of Launch
Germany 1978
Canada 1988
Japan 1989
Nordic Countries 1989
   - Sweden, Norway,     Iceland, Finland, & Denmark (as of 2000)
USA 1989
New Zealand 1990
Sweden - Good Environmental Choice 1990
Austria 1991India 1991
European Commission 1992
France 1992
Korea 1992
Netherlands 1992Singapore 1992
Sweden - TCO Development 1992
Taiwan / ROC 1992
Brazil 1993
Croatia 1993Israel 1993
Thailand 1993
China (PRC) 1994
Czech Republic 1994
Hungary 1994
Indonesia 1995
Malaysia 1996Hong Kong 2000
Australia 2001
NOTES: This annex lists members of  GEN and is not an exhaustive list of eco-labelling
programs. Other programs may exist and/or may be formulated / in formulation atthis time. Please note that the United  Kingdom, Spain, Greece and Luxembourg are
also members of GEN.
__________