WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/TE/W/15
17 October 2002
(02-5629)
Committee on Trade and Environment
Special SessionOriginal:  English
MEAS: INFORMATION EXCHANGE AND OBSERVER STATUS
Submission by the European Communities
Paragraph 31(ii)
I. INTRODUCTION
1. As stated in paragraph 5 of the first EC contribution (TN/TE/W/1) on the Trade and
Environment (T&E) elements of the DDA, the EC considers paragraph 31 (ii) an important part of the
mandate and seeks to reach a positive outcome.  We believe that the debate on paragraph 31 (ii) must
be organized in a way that allows fo r timely and full MEAs and UNEP input.
2. This indeed seems an element of the DDA where it would be reasonable to aim for decisions
by the time of the next WTO Ministerial meeting.  Since Doha, the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment has reinforced the development of consensus on the need to “ promote mutual
supportiveness between the multilateral trading system and the multilateral environmental
agreements, consistent with sustainable development goals, in support of the work programme agreed
through WTO, while recognizing the importance of maintaining the integrity of both sets of
instruments ”.  To turn this consensus into firm WTO decisions at the first opportunity will send a
positive and necessary signal to civil society and other observers that the trade and environment
linkage is receiving close attention.
3. In Doha, Ministers have agreed to the following:
With a view to enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment, we
agree to negotiations, without prejudging their outcome, on:
(ii) procedures for regular information exchange between MEA Secretariats and the
relevant WTO committees, and the criteria for the granting of observer status
4. Paragraph 31 (ii) of the DDA contains two different - however interlinked - elements for the
negotiations ahead of us.  The first one, related to the procedures for regular information exchange
between MEAs Secretariats and the relevant WTO committees should be seen as complementary to
the second one, related to the criteria for the granti ng of observer status, the two aiming at providing
MEAs the status and role they deserve in view of the increasing interface between trade andenvironment and, in particular, between MEAs and WTO rules.
5. To that effect, the EC welcomes the submissi on from the United States (TN/TE/W/5), the
WTO Secretariat document " Existing forms of cooperation and information exchange between
UNEP/MEAs and the WTO"  (TN/TE/S/2) and UNEP contribution submitted to the June CTE Regular
Session (WT/CTE/W/213).  The EC also shares the interest expressed by UNEP to launch a reflectionon the timeliness and effectiveness of the exchange systems so far in place.TN/TE/W/15
Page 2
II. PROCEDURES FOR REGULAR INFORMATION EXCHANGE BETWEEN MEA
SECRETARIATS AND THE RELEVANT WTO COMMITTEES
6. As already mentioned, in the past, the CTE has held several information sessions with the
Secretariats of a wide range of selected MEAs mainly in order to inform WTO Members on the trade-
related developments of these MEAs and proceed to an exchange of views on such developments.For ease of reference, we will refer to these as "core" MEAs.  Several papers have been tabled by
these Secretariats and compiled by the WTO Secretariat.  While noting that discussions did not a
priori allow for concrete and measurable results, these sessions proved nonetheless useful and
constructive in allowing for a valuable flow of information on trade-related MEA activities to trade
representatives in the WTO context, which was actually the main purpose of such sessions.  It should
also be seen as a two-way flow as it also helps to raise awareness of WTO issues and concerns among
MEA secretariats.
7. The EC considers that the WTO and MEA interface should go beyond a mere information
exchange, without real structure and follow-up.  These information exchange sessions should now
become a formal feature of WTO work and consequently become officially institutionalized, as
meetings of the CTE in regular session.  There could also be informal meetings in cases where
broader participation of organisations not enjoying observer status is desirable.  But otherwise
information exchange can become a regular feature of CTE regular work.
8. Information exchange sessions should cont inue to act as a two-way information and
awareness-raising tool.  They should constitute fora to debate issues arising from the DDA, successive
WTO work programmes and the implementation of existing WTO Agreements which have a direct
impact on MEAs and their objectives.  Concerning the DDA, both paragraph 33 (technical assistanceand capacity building in the field of trade and environment), or paragraph 37 (transfer of technology)
represent good examples as several MEAs do have a very important component of technical
assistance and technology transfer (UNFCCC, Basel Convention, Montreal Protocol…).  These
information exchange sessions should continue to  take place in the CTE but other relevant WTO
Committees should also be encouraged to convene such information sessions.
9. As stated in paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration, the objective of sustainable development is
a common overarching commitment of WTO Members.  Therefore the transfer of environmentally
sound technology deserves special consideration.  This issue is also likely to have spillover effect in
relation to paragraph 31(iii) dealing with the reduction/elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to
environmental goods and services.  The information exchange sessions should also remain important
fora where emerging trade-related issues in the sphere of work of MEAs should be debated.
10. In order to maximize the utility of these sessions and to make them as concrete as possible,
each session could be devoted to (i) one or more topics which have been clearly defined in advance
(such as technology transfer, technical assistance, dispute settlement and compliance, optimum use of
economic instruments, special and differentiated treatment for LDCs) proposed by the WTO
Secretariat, after consultation with MEAs Secretariats and UNEP, and (ii) any WTO-related issue
within the terms of reference of the CTE with an impact on MEAs.  Any issue related to trade whichhas come up in the context of the work of an MEA should be addressed in these sessions (for instance
notification to the TBT Committee).  WTO Members co uld provide the Chair with input allowing the
maintenance of a list of topical issues.  Oral presentations could be made by WTO members, MEA
Secretariats, the WTO Secretariat and UNEP.  Institu tions and NGOs with expert ise in the field under
debate could also be invited to give presentations.  Summary reports of each session should beprepared by the WTO Secretariat under its own responsibility and transmitted to other relevant WTO
Committees.  Such sessions should take place twice a year.
11. An important element of this information exchange process should be that, in line with past
practice, Secretariats of MEAs that have not yet entered into force should also be invited.TN/TE/W/15
Page 3
12. During sessions of Conferences of the Parties (COP) of MEAs, the WTO should be more
visible and side events should be systematically organized in the margins of the COP to allow for an
exchange of views on current work programmes and issues of mutual interest.  The secretariat should
assess the resource implications of carrying out such a mandate effectively and inform members.
13. WTO regional seminars on trade and environment could represent an attractive complement
to the more formal Geneva meetings.  Other IGOs, such as UNDP, UNIDO, UNCTAD should also be
invited.  Some MEA secretariats have been invited, together with UNEP1, to the last such WTO
regional seminar (St. Lucia), which was very well received and clearly helped to build bridges
between the trade and environment communities at national and regional levels.  The EC should
therefore strongly encourage the WTO to invite them more systematically.
14. Another important feature of this information exchange process could be to maintain an
electronic database as part of the WTO website, wh ere relevant T&E documents (not only those of the
WTO) could be downloaded and identifying links with  other relevant websites, in particular those of
UNEP and MEAs.
III. OBSERVER STATUS
15. The purpose of this paper is not to address the more general issue of observer status either in
WTO bodies or in the negotiating bodies stemming  from the DDA, which is currently addressed by
the General Council and the Trade Negotiating Committee.  However, the EC notes that DDA
paragraph 31 (ii) provides a specific mandate to WTO Members to address the case of observer status
of MEAs in the WTO.  Without prejudice to the final solution in this regard, the EC supports the idea
that, pending a definitive decision to grant observer status, the CTE SS should in the interim make an
ad-hoc invitation to UNEP and the MEAs Secretariats which had previously participated in the MEAInformation Sessions to attend CTE normal and special sessions.
16. "Enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment"  is a strategic objective
which should deserve a high political ambition.  Mechanisms will have to be put in place, if we want
to replace words by deeds.  The EC considers that if Ministers instructed us to elaborate criteria for
the granting of observer status to MEAs Secretariats in relevant WTO committees, it is explicit thatMEAs Secretariats should be considered prima facie  differently than other IGOs.
17. Alinea 1 of Annex 3 to the Rules of Procedur es for Sessions of the Ministerial Conference
and Meetings of the General Council (WT/L/161) states that " the purpose of observer status for IGOs
in the WTO is to enable these organisations to follow discussions therein on matters of direct interest
to them."  Alinea 2 of the same Annex 3 also states that " requests for observer status shall
accordingly be considered from organisations which have competence and a direct interest in trade
policy matters, or which, … have responsibilities related to those of the WTO."
18. If we consider on the one hand the legitimate objective to enhance the mutual supportiveness
of trade and environment, and on the other hand what is the current situation as described in Annex 3
to the Rules of Procedures, the EC considers that, in light of the contribution they can bring to
fulfilling the mandate of the CTE, MEAs Secretariats should be granted observer status in both the
Regular and Special Sessions.
19. We have to look at the current situation regarding the participation of MEAs Secretariats in
relevant WTO committees.  Information can be found in document WT/CTE/W/41/Rev.8.  In the
CTE, four MEAs Secretariats and UNEP enjoy the status of observer: the Convention on Biological
                                                     
1 UNEP is always invited and actually present, as a result of the cooperation arrangement between
UNEP and the WTO signed in Seattle.TN/TE/W/15
Page 4
Diversity (CBD), the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES), the International Commission for th e Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) and the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  The request from the
International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO ) is pending.  For other WTO committees, UNEP
request is pending for the General Council and the Council for TRIPS, and the CBD request ispending for the Committee on Agriculture and the Council for TRIPS.
20. As regards the CTE, the EC proposes that all "core" MEAs which have participated in the
previous information sessions should be granted observer status in the CTE in both the Regular and
Special Sessions.  This would represent around 13 MEAs (see TN/TE/S/2 paragraph 11), the
Cartagena and the Kyoto Protocols being respectively covered by the CBD and the UNFCCC.  All
these MEAs do have a trade component, as indicated in the "Matrix" elaborated by the WTO
Secretariat (WT/CTE/W/160/Rev.1) and can be considered to have a "competence" and a "directinterest" in trade policy matters.
21. As regards requests by other MEAs for observer status in the CTE or requests by core MEAs
for observer status in other WTO committees, we also propose that there be a strong presumption in
favour of prompt positive decisions to grant observer status.  We request that the Chair sound out the
current "core" MEAs in order to establish an understanding of their interest in other Committees.  Wesuggest an informal session of the CTESS to discuss the results of these consultations in the presence
of those MEAs, in December.  We envisage that the most relevant committees would include at least
bodies such as the TBT Committee, the SPS Committee, the Committee on Trade and Development,
the Council for TRIPS, or the Committee on Agriculture.
22. The decision to grant observer status should formally still be taken by each WTO Committee
receiving such a request.  The positive presumption should be without prejudice to the state of general
WTO rules and practice on observership.  If problems arise in implementation, the chairs of the
General Council, the CTE and the other committee in question should consult to resolve matters.
23. A very important element to consider is the participation of UNEP in the WTO relevant
committees, as their observer status in the CTE is already in force.  UNEP has played and is stillplaying a very important role in the context of the work of the CTE.  The collaboration between WTO
and UNEP has been formalized by the cooperation arrangement concluded in Seattle in November
1999.  In this context, it is also worth recalling that our Ministers in Doha "welcomed the WTO’s
continued cooperation with UNEP and other IGO s".
24. UNEP has organized several meetings, back-to-back to the CTE, on various trade and
environment related issues since 1999 and has actively taken part in the regional seminars on Trade
and Environment organized by the WTO Secretariat in developing countries and economies intransition.
25. In light of all these elements, the EC fully supports the observer status of UNEP in a set of
those WTO committees UNEP deems "relevant" to its work, and in particular in the Committee on
Trade and Development.  This reflects the emphasis on trade-environment-development linkages at
the WSSD.  We request that the Chair consult UNEP to establish an understanding of UNEP’sperceived needs.TN/TE/W/15
Page 5
IV. CONCLUSION
26. The EC seeks a positive outcome on the negotiations on paragraph 31 (ii) and considers that
the goal of enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment, which has been endorsed
by Ministers in Doha, should start with appropriate representation of MEAs in the CTE and relevant
WTO committees.
27. The EC supports that "core" MEAs should have their request for observer status in the CTE
granted because we consider that they have a competence and a direct interest in trade policy matters.
As regards requests by other MEAs in the CTE or requests by "core" MEAs in other WTO
committees, there should be a strong presumption in favour of a prompt decision to grant observer
status.
28. The EC supports the idea that the CTESS shoul d immediately issue an ad hoc invitation to
UNEP and the MEAs Secretariats which have previously participated in the MEA InformationSessions to attend CTE normal and special sessions
29. The EC supports the observer status of UNEP in the WTO committees it deems relevant,
along the lines of the cooperation arrangement signed in Seattle.
30. Information exchange sessions should become a formal feature of WTO work.  They should
be institutionalized and go beyond a mere information exchange, with real structure and follow-up.
31. And last but not least, WTO should also be more visible in MEAs’ Conferences of the Parties,
as both trade and environment negotiators must understand and integrate the constraints, be they
positive or negative, imposed by each respective regime on the other, if synergies have to emerge and
frictions to be avoided at the interface of WTO and MEAs.
__________