WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/TE/2
4 July 2002
(02-3744)
Committee on Trade and Environment
Special SessionOriginal:  English
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE
COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT TO THE
TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE
1. The second meeting of the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment
(CTE) was held from 11-12 June 2002.  The meeting had been announced in the convening notice
WTO/AIR/1806.  A number of procedural and substantive issues were discussed.
I. PROCEDURAL ISSUES
2. The CTE Special Session adopted the results of the informal consultations on Organization of
Work held on 3 May 2002.  On the phases of work , it was agreed that the work of 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, and study the background documents prepared by
the Secretariat and submitted by participants.  It was decided that the Special Session would not
divide its work into rigid phases, or set deadlines for them.  The Philippines agreed to proceed withthe study phase, on the understanding that negotiating guidelines would be drafted prior to the start of
actual negotiations. On the number of meetings  to be held in 2002, it was agreed that the
Special Session would hold a total of four meetings, and that it would devote its fourth to an
Information Session with multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs).
3. The CTE Special Session agreed that the MEA In formation Session to be held at its fourth
meeting be of a one-day duration, and be conducted in an informal mode.  It was decided that the
Information Session would address paragraph 31(ii)  of the Doha Ministerial Declaration in its
entirety, and that the possibility of holding another such Session in 2003 would be considered.  It was
also decided that all 13 organizations which had previously participated in MEA Information Sessions
in the regular CTE would be invited, together with the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP).  This would be without prejudice to what participants considered to be an "MEA" for the
purposes of the negotiations.  The Secretariat was requested to find a suitable date for this meeting.
II. SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
A. PARAGRAPH 31(I) ON MEA S AND THE WTO
4. A number of new papers were circulated under this item:  (1) document TN/TE/S/1 by the
Secretariat, entitled  MEAs and WTO Rules; Proposals Made in the CTE from 1995-2002 ;
(2) document TN/TE/W/2 by Argentina; (3) document TN/TE/W/4 by Switzerland; and (4) documentTN/TE/W/7 by Australia.  The European Communities (EC) had previously circulated a document
under this item at the March meeting, document TN/TE/W/1.  Discussion revolved around a
procedural approach suggested by Australia; the scope of the paragraph 31(i) mandate; the term
"MEA";  the term "specific trade obligations" (STOs); and the potential outcome of the negotiations.TN/TE/2
Page 2
5. Australia proposed that the CTE Special Session divide its work into three phases.  The first
phase would identify the STOs in MEAs that need to be discussed, with the Secretariat document
WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.1, entitled Matrix on Trade Measures Pursuant to Selected MEAs , serving as a
basis.  It would also identify WTO rules relevant to those obligations.  The second phase would
launch an interactive process among participants to determine whether implementation issues hadarisen with respect to those STOs.  The third phase would address matters arising from the first two
phases.  Several participants expressed their support for the Australian approach.  However, some of
them argued that it needed to be combined with an examination of the concepts contained in the
mandate, as done in the Argentinian paper, and viewed the two papers as complementary.  One
participant stated that the Australian approach should not have to cut-off the submission of further
papers on definitional issues or on principles and parameters to govern the WTO-MEA relationship,
arguing that the Special Session could proceed along several parallel tracks.  A few participants saidthey needed more time to consider the proposal.
6. Some discussion was held on the scope of the mandate in an attempt to develop a common
understanding of the issues it covered.  The term "MEA" was discussed, and while some participants
started to define it, others were of the view that (a) it did not need to be defined, (b) MEAs could be
identified instead of defined, or that (c) STOs should provide the lead on which MEAs to consider.  Inthis context, several comments were made on whether the term could include regional environmental
accords or MEAs that had not yet entered into force.  On the term "STOs", much discussion took
place on the nature of the trade measures in MEAs that could be considered first, specific, second,
trade-related, and, third, an obligation.  Both narrow and broad interpretations were advanced.
Numerous comments were also made on the importance of not prejudging the outcome of thenegotiations.  Several participants argued that the proposal contained in the Swiss paper, to adopt an
interpretative decision on the relationship between WTO rules and STOs in MEAs, was premature.
Finally, a number of participants stressed the necessity of technical assistance and capacity building to
enhance their involvement in the negotiations.
B. P
ARAGRAPH 31(II) ON INFORMATION EXCHANGE & C RITERIA FOR OBSERVER STATUS
7. Two new papers were circulated under this item:  (1) document TN/TE/S/2 by the Secretariat,
entitled Existing Mechanisms for Cooperation and Information Exchange Between UNEP/MEAs and
the WTO ; and (2) document TN/TE/W/5, by the US. The discussion of the US paper centered on two
themes:  cooperation and information exchange on the one hand, and observer status on the other.
With respect to the first, comments were initially made on the importance of national coordination
between trade and environment officials, with some participants stressing that this was the
responsibility of national governments, and not of the WTO, to ensure.  Some felt that suchcoordination was particularly critical in the preparatory process for the World Summit on Sustainable
Development (WSSD).
8. Most participants argued that past cooperation and information exchange practices between
UNEP/MEAs and the WTO, documented in TN/TE/S/2, needed to be either institutionalized or
regularized, or taken further.  However, the opinion was also expressed that their effectiveness mayfirst have to be assessed.  The importance of joint technical assistance activities between the WTO,
MEAs and UNEP, and of MEA Information Sessions, wa s stressed, with some participants calling for
a two-way information flow.  On the exchange of documents between these organizations, some
participants emphasized that any exchange would have to obey the newly approved General Council
rules on document derestriction, and to respect document confidentiality.  One participant regrettedthat UNEP had been unable to organize a meeting back-to-back with this session of the Committee,
since such meetings facilitated the participation of capital-based environment officials and led to
greater national coordination.  Finally, some reiterated the view that progress on paragraph 31(ii) of
the negotiations could have a "positive spillover" on 31(i).TN/TE/2
Page 3
9. On observer status, while a number of participants saw the issue as being a horizontal one,
which needed to be addressed by either the General Council or the Trade Negotiations Committee
(TNC), some argued that the paragraph 31(ii) allowed the CTE Special Session to develop criteria for
such status at its own level.  One delegation argued that there was a need to develop objective criteria
to prevent political considerations from entering in to the picture in the consideration of requests for
observership.  Several stressed that MEAs had a direct interest in more than just the work of the CTE,
and that they needed to be involved in other WTO bodies as well.  An appeal was made by a number
of participants that observer status be granted in the CTE Special Session as quickly as possible.
C. PARAGRAPH 31(III) ON ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS AND SERVICES
10. Document TN/TE/W/6 by New Zealand on Environmental  Goods  was presented under this
item to help the CTE Special Session in its reflection on the definition of these goods, and the nature
of the monitoring role that it would play with respect to the work conducted in the Negotiating Group
on Non-Agricultural Market Access.  The paper was a recirculated version of the environmental
chapter of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum's (APEC) proposal on accelerated tariff
liberalization (ATL).  APEC had used an Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) definition of the environmen tal industry as basis for the identification of
the goods covered by the ATL initiative.
11. Numerous comments were made on this definition, with concerns raised on issues such
as:  how products with multiple end-uses would be classified; whether process and production
methods (PPMs) and end-use criteria would be needed to define environmental goods and what
the implications of that would be on the c oncept of "like products";  how the harmonized
system would capture those goods;  and how the relativity of the concept of "environmentalfriendliness" would be tackled (since some goods  considered environmentally friendly in some
parts of the world could be seen as unfriendly in others).  One delegation argued that while it
was important not to rule out a definitional approach for work on environmental goods,
definitions should not be seen as a precondition for progress to be made.
D. 
OTHER BUSINESS
12. Document TN/TE/W/3 by the EC on Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) was circulated
under this item.  A number of participants argued that the CTE Special Session was not the
appropriate Committee for it.
13. Based on the recurrent requests made by some participants for technical assistance in the
context of these negotiations, the Chairperson asked for an identification of specific needs.  She
indicated that the next meeting of the CTE Special Session would take place
from 10-11 October 2002.
__________