WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/CTE/W/184
12 February 2001
(01-0645)
Committee on Trade and Environment Original:  English
CHAIRMAN’S SUMMARY: UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (UNEP)
MEETING ON ENHANCING SYNERGIES AND MUTUAL SUPPORTIVENESS
OF MULTILATERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS
AND THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
Palais des Nations, 23 October 2000
Communication from UNEP
I. OBJECTIVE, STRUCTURE AND OUTPUTS OF THE MEETING
1. This meeting, convened by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in
cooperation with the Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and the World Trade
Organization (WTO) Secretariat on 23 October 2000, was intended to provide a constructive, open
and informal dialogue between trade and environm ent officials on ways to enhance synergies between
MEAs and the WTO.  The meeting focused on concrete examples of the relationship between MEAsand the WTO, and sought to contribute to other processes, including the WTO’s Committee on Trade
and Environment (CTE).  The objectives of the meeting were to seek the advice of government
officials and to identify activities that could be  undertaken, individually or collectively, by UNEP,
MEAs, and the WTO to enhance synergies between these regimes.
2. The importance of enhancing synergies was underpinned by the attendance at the meeting of
Dr. Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director of UNEP, Mr. Mike Moore, Director-General of the WTO, and
Mr. Rubens Ricupero, the Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Trade andDevelopment (UNCTAD), and who delivered statements at the meeting.  The meeting was attended
by over 200 delegates from approximately 90 countries, and by representatives from
intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations.  MEAs represented at the meeting included
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Basel Convention, the Convention on Trade in
Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES), the Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of theMontreal Protocol, the Convention on Migrator y Species (CMS), the Convention to Combat
Desertification (UNCCD), and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Senior and chief executives of the CBD, the Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the
Montreal Protocol, CITES, the Secretariat of  the Basel Convention (SBC), UNCCD and UNFCCC
made presentations at the meeting.
3. This document represents a Chairman’s summa ry of the meeting.  Without attempting to
itemize the many important contributions made, it pr ovides an overview of the main issues raised by
participants and a list of future work that was suggested by some government representatives, and that
may be undertaken by UNEP in collaboration with MEAs and the WTO Secretariat.  This summary
does not represent a consensus document by Governments attending the meeting.  Rather, it is offeredby the Chair as a source of information for Governments, and to seek their further input and guidance
as part of an ongoing informal, collaborative initiative to foster synergies between trade and
environment policies, rules and institutions.WT/CTE/W/184
Page 2
II. MAIN POINTS ARISING FROM DISCUSSIONS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
• Concern was expressed about the scale and pace of environmental degradation, which
underlined the need for effective MEAs.
• Poverty can be an important cause of environmental degradation, which must be
addressed in developing policy solutions that fully integrate trade, environment and
development concerns.
B. THE ROLE OF DIALOGUE AND COMMUNICATION
• Participants welcomed the meeting and emphasized the value of enhancing informal
dialogue between trade and environment officials, UNEP, MEAs and WTOSecretariats.
• Emphasis was given to the need to strengthen coordination between the trade and
environment ministries at the national level.
• It was also noted that there is a need to increase the participation of developing
country representatives from both trade and environment ministries in meetings suchas these, including the meetings of the WTO's Committee on Trade and Environment.
• Developing communication and dialogue  between developing and developed
countries, outside formal negotiating fora, will help to identify areas of commoninterest.
C. I
NSTITUTIONAL COOPERATION
• Enhanced involvement of developing countries in the trade and environment
negotiations is hampered by the dispersed locations of environmental institutions and
the multiplicity of meetings.
• Enhanced cooperation among UNEP, MEAs and the WTO will help realize synergies
and strengthen the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment regimes.
• Ongoing cooperation is desirable, including in the context of the UNEP-WTO
Elements of Cooperation.
• UNEP, MEAs and the WTO should provide substantive input to each other’s work
and workshops, including participation by WTO staff at MEA meetings, and observerstatus for UNEP and MEAs in WTO Committees and Councils.
• UNEP was encouraged to continue to develop internal synergies among the UNEP-
administered MEAs.
D. T
ECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY BUILDING
• Technical cooperation and capacity building were identified as areas requiring the
enhanced and concerted efforts of UNEP, MEAs and the WTO.  The UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity Building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development
was identified as being able to make an important contribution in this context.
• There is merit in running joint awareness raising and training activities.  Regional
workshops provide a useful way to bring together trade and environmental officials to
explore synergies, and to discuss concrete issues of concern to them.WT/CTE/W/184
Page 3
E. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER , FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND MARKET INCENTIVES
• There are significant synergies to be realized in the implementation of these measures
in MEAs and the WTO, including in relation to technology transfer.
• There is a need for more supportive measures in MEAs, such as technology transfer,
financial transfers, and the use of market incentives to achieve sustainable
development.  The effectiveness of such supportive measures should be enhanced.
F. TRADE MEASURES AND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
• Effective MEAs help to prevent disputes from arising in the WTO’s dispute
settlement system, and thus provide an important source of mutual supportiveness forthe trading system.
• MEAs use trade measures as part of balanced packages of instruments to address
environmental problems of concern to the international community.
• There is a need to strengthen compliance and dispute settlement mechanisms in
MEAs, both to enhance the effective implementation of MEAs, and to reduce anypotential for tension.
• Reducing tensions between trade and environmental regimes would be enhanced
through better communication and underst anding of the compliance and dispute
settlement systems in MEAs and the WTO, and by dissemination of Appellate Body
decisions.  Sharing expertise in respective areas of competence may help reduce thepotential for disputes.
G. A
SSESSMENT
• Assessment of the impacts of trade liberalization on the environment as well as the
economic and trade impacts of MEAs were emphasized as areas requiring further
attention.
III. POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS FOR UNEP, MEAs AND THE WTO
• UNEP, MEAs and the WTO Secretariat should continue their process of engagement
to seek synergies among trade and environment policies, rules and institutions.
• Observer status for UNEP and MEAs in WTO bodies, including in the
General Council, Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
Council and the Committee on Agriculture, are a priority.
• Joint capacity-building efforts, incl uding through future meetings, and in
collaboration with relevant organizations such as UNCTAD should be developed to
assist the implementation of MEAs and WTO agreements.
• Assessments should be explored as a tool to increase policy coherence at the national
level, and to realize win-win opportunities between MEAs and the WTO, for examplein the context of the Convention to Combat Desertification, the CBD and CITES.
• In the context of the CBD, issues highlighted for further collaboration with the WTO
include assessment of the impact of specialization of agriculture on biodiversity, inconformity with a decision passed at its Fifth Conference of the Parties.  Other
potential issues include further exploring the interrelationship between the CBD andWT/CTE/W/184
Page 4
the TRIPS Agreement and the possibility of collaboration between information
exchange mechanisms existing in the WTO,  and under development in the Biosafety
Protocol.
• The relationship between the TRIPS Agreement (e.g. Arts. 7, 8 and 66.2) and the
provisions in MEAs for the transfer of environmentally sound technology could be
further explored by UNEP, MEAs and the WTO.
• UNEP and WTO could consider elaborating a paper contrasting dispute settlement
and compliance practices in both regimes, for use as a reference for negotiators oftrade and environment agreements.
• UNEP, together with WTO and MEAs, could examine the use of trade measures
pursuant to MEAs, and the rules of the multilateral trading system, with a view toenhancing synergies and reducing tensions with the trading system.
• UNEP, together with WTO and MEAs, could examine the elaboration of a tool (e.g. a
checklist) to provide MEA negotiators with guidance on the use of trade measures in
order to maximize synergies between the two regimes.
__________