. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/8 
20 April 2004 
 (04-1785) 
Committee on Trade and Environment 
Special Session  
 
 
 
REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF  
THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT  
TO THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE 
 
 
1. The eighth meeting of the Committee on Trade and Environment Special Session (CTESS) 
was held on 19 April 2004. 
I. STATUS OF WORK 
2. The meeting was marked by constructive discussi ons on all three components of the trade and 
environment negotiating mandate. U nder paragraphs 31 (i) and (ii),  one new submission had been 
tabled – document TN/TE/W/39 by the European Co mmunities (EC).  The EC submission argued that 
it could be useful for the CTESS to explore th e Multilateral Environmental Agreement (MEA)/WTO 
relationship in the context of global governance principles.  These principles included emphasizing the importance and necessity of MEAs;  the need to design environmental policy within multilateral 
environmental fora; the need for close cooperati on and increased information flow at the national 
level, and at the international le vel between various international bodies for the mutual supportiveness 
of trade and environmental policies; the fact  that MEAs and the WTO were equal bodies of 
international law;  and the need to not interpret WTO rules in "clinical isolation" from other bodies of 
international law.  The EC indicated that its subm ission did not preclude analytical discussions in the 
CTESS on the specific trade obligations (STOs) in MEAs. 
3. Some support was expressed for the governance pr inciples suggested by the EC, particularly 
on the need to develop common approaches to ad dress global environmental problems, avoiding 
unilateral action.  One participant argued that what would ultimately be needed would be an 
interpretative decision on mutual supportiveness a nd deference in the WTO/MEA relationship.  
Certain specific questions were put to the EC on the governance principles;  for instance, about how 
they could work in practice to avoid MEA/WTO conflicts, and the type of instrument in which they could be embodied.  
4. However, the position was also taken that govern ance principles fell outside the paragraph 31 
(i) mandate, and that it was premature to discuss potential outcomes.  Numerous participants insisted on the need for the CTESS to continue to build a firm, factual and analytical foundation to support whatever results were reached on this part of the mandate.    
5. Some participants drew attention to the links and potential synergies between  paragraphs 31 
(i) and (ii) of the mandate, indicating that an out come on 31 (ii) could also have a positive effect 
on 31 (i).  Under paragraph 31 (ii), numerous par ticipants welcomed the list of potential avenues for 
increased cooperation and information exchange, on which Ambassador Yolande  Biké had reported to 
the TNC in document TN/TE/7.  It was suggested  that the Committee could benefit from further 
discussion of the items on the list, and that an even tual consolidation could be contemplated.  The 
criteria for the granting of observer status were al so discussed, with some participants calling for a 
delinking of this part of the mandate from th e broader observer status question in the WTO. TN/TE/8 
Page 2  
 
6. A very useful exchange on Paragraph 31 (iii) took place at the meeting, and revolved around a 
submission by the United States (US) - document TN/TE/W/38.  The exchange was particularly welcomed in light of the fact that relatively little time could be allocated to this part of the mandate in 
previous CTESS meetings. The US paper calle d for the establishment of a "core" and a 
"complementary" list of environm ental goods.  The core list woul d embody products on which there 
was a consensus that they constituted environmenta l goods, and the complementary list would include 
products on which a definitive consensus could not be  reached, but for which there was a "high degree 
of acknowledgment" that they were significant for environmental protection, pollution prevention or 
remediation, and sustainability.  Modalities for trad e liberalization were suggested for the two lists.   
7. The flexibility offered in the paper was welc omed by numerous delegations, although the 
argument was made that it would be important not to preclude any options at this stage, and to 
consider other avenues for providing flexibility in the negotiations.  It was also argued that a list-
based approach may not work in isolation, and th at there could be a need  for the development of 
criteria or a definition of environmental goods. 
8. Questions were posed on various aspects of th e US paper, including on:  the relationship 
between the core and the complementary list, the pr ocedures for achieving consensus on the core list, 
the interpretation of the term "high degree of acknowledgement" for the complementary list, the 
extent to which the complementary list could lead to  a plurilateral process of trade liberalization, and 
the application of the concepts of less than full reci procity and special and differential treatment to the 
lists.    
9. Numerous participants were of the view  that the product and production method (PPM) 
criterion should not be used in the negotiations.  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 tran sfer and on their enhanced international 
competitiveness.  One participant enquired about th e forum in which agricultural environmental goods 
would be treated, and another participant indicated  that it would be working on a development-
oriented list of environmental goods.  
II. FUTURE WORK 
10. The CTESS will, of course, continue to explor e all aspects of its mandate.  However, the 
suggestion was made at the meeting that there was a need for more structured work under 
paragraph 31 (iii) - perhaps even a wo rk programme under this item.   
11. I will be holding informal consultations with delegations with a view to achieving further 
progress on the mandate of this Committee. 
_________