INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
15 June 2023 
(23-4080) Page: 1/9 
Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured 
Discussions  Original:  English  
 
  
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY STRUCTURED DISCUSSIONS  (TESSD)  
INFORMAL WORKING GROUP  MEETINGS  
HELD ON 10-11 MAY  2023 
Summary of discussions1 
1  Remarks by the TESSD Coordinators  
1.1.  In their introductory remarks, the TESSD Co-convenors2 recalled that , in the 2021 TESSD 
Ministerial Statement , Members had indicated their intention to seek out opportunities to take action, 
either individually or collectively, for environmentally sustain able trade. They encouraged Members 
to reflect on their exchanges in TESSD and find potential areas of convergence and shared interests 
for future work and action to achieve their environmental goals. Further, the Co-convenors  indicated 
that different outcomes could be possible: a baseline would be a compilation of Member inputs or 
summary documents which would capture the information shared and discussions since the 12 th 
WTO Ministerial Conference (MC12). At a slightly more am bitious level, Members could work together 
on some of these compilations to identify best practices that could be released as products of TESSD. 
Additionally, the Co-convenors  encouraged voluntary actions or the adoption of practices by groups 
of Members, such as adding more information to their notifications of environmental measures. As 
Members would pilot different actions, this could help other Members in their evaluation of whether 
to take similar actions.  
1.2.  Welcome was extended to Maur o Bruno (Uruguay) , the new facilitator of the Working Group 
on Subsidies, and gratitude was conveyed to his predecessor Mariana Vera (Uruguay), as well as to 
Helga Helland (Norway) and Göksu Tülümen (Türkiye), since th ese were their last meeting s as 
facilitators of the Wor king Groups on Environmental Goods and Services and Trade -related Climate 
Measures, respectively.  
1.3.  In their closing remarks after the four Working Group meetings, the Co -convenors  commended 
the substantive discussions that had taken place, and expressed ap preciation for Members' efforts 
and engagement in TESSD. They underlined the importance of getting a clearer view on the outputs 
that Members would like to achieve by the end of the year in the four Working Groups. They 
mentioned  that at the next Plenary M eeting, tentatively scheduled for 11 -12 July , some time would 
be dedicated to discussing  possible outputs towards MC13, and encouraged the participation of 
Ambassadors.  
 
1 This summary provides a non -exhaustive, illustrative summary of the issues addressed by Members, 
prepared and circulated under the responsibility of the facilitators chairing the meetings: Carlos Guevara 
(Ecuador) and Helga Helland (Norway) for the Working Group on Environmental Good s and Services; 
Mauro  Bruno (Uruguay) and Sveinn K. Einarsson (Iceland) for the Working Group on Subsidies ; 
Jean-Marie  Meraldi (Switzerland) and Göksu Tülümen (Türkiye) for the Working Group on Trade -related 
Climate Measures; and Olivia Cook (Chile) and Ka zunari Morii (Japan) for the Working Group on Circular 
Economy – Circularity . 
2 Nicola Waterfield (Canada) and Ana Lizano (Costa Rica) on behalf of the Co-convenors.  INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 2 - 
  2  Working Group on Environmental Goods and Services  (EGS)  – 10 Ma y (a.m.)3 
Wind energy and hydropower  
2.1.  A presentation was made by Ernst & Young focusing on services inputs to the wind energy 
value chain. The presentation elaborated on the role of services in decarbonizing supply chains, as 
well as the professional services required at different stages of wi nd power projects throughout their 
lifecycles including, inter alia , site selection, engineering, legal services, technical services, 
consulting services, environmental impact assessments, financial services, and maintenance 
services.  
2.2.  As part of the discu ssions, Members reacted to the presentation and responded to the following 
questions:  
Services : 
• What services are important for the development, installation and operation of wind energy 
and hydropower projects to achieve climate change mitigation and adap tation objectives?  
 
• What are the main barriers to trade in these services?  
 
• What is your experience or what do you see as possible approaches to promoting and 
facilitating trade in these services?  
 
Goods : 
• What are key goods to allow wind energy and hydrop ower to achieve climate change 
mitigation and adaptation objectives?  
 
• What are the main bottlenecks in supply chains or barriers to the dissemination of these 
goods?  
 
• What is your experience or what do you see as possible approaches to promoting and 
facilitating trade in these goods?  
 
2.3.  Members discussed the significance of trade in services for wind energy and hydropower 
projects. Key services identified by Members included , inter alia , engineering, architectural, 
construction, financing, operation and main tenance, nature and landscape protection, urban 
planning, site investigation, installation, research and development, and repair services. Some 
Members noted the importance of foreign investments and the opportunity of enhanced services 
commitments in Mode  3 (commercial presence) for promoting job creation, higher salaries, and 
knowledge transfer in emerging economies, as well as the relevance of Mode 1 (cross -border supply) 
and Mode 4 (movement of professionals) for wind and hydropower projects.  
2.4.  One Membe r highlighted the relevance of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)'s Model 
Schedule of Commitments for Environmental and Environmentally Related Services for the 
identification of essential services for wind and hydropower projects, including dam and power plant 
construction services. Another Member suggested , as a first step , to develop a non -exhaustive list 
of relevant services and then to survey the main obstacles, including by using tools such as the 
Organisation for Economic Co -operation and D evelopment  (OECD )'s Services Trade Restrictiveness 
Index (STRI) and services commitments, with a view to identify ing best practices for the promotion 
and facilitation of trade in these services. Another Member noted that environmental services in wind 
energy and hydropower projects would require a multidimensional approach involving additional 
service sectors beyond tho se captured by Central Product Classification ( CPC) 94. 
2.5.  Members also highlighted barriers that could impact trade in services related to wind and 
hydropower projects. These included lack of transparency, local content requirements, performance 
requirements, limited access to finance, skilled workforce and advan ced technologies, and 
 
3 Sixteen Members contributed to the discussions: Australia; Brazil; Canada; Chile; China; Costa Rica; 
Ecuador; E uropean Union ; Japan; Norway; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Singapore; Switzerland; U nited Kingdom ; 
United States ; Uruguay.  INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 3 - 
  restrictions on the movement of professionals. Another Member highlighted that the Joint Statement 
Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation may be able to address some of the barriers highlighted, 
as well as to promote transparency and predictability in regulatory practices.  
2.6.  Members also discussed key goods for the wind and hydropower sector s. Some of the goods 
highlighted by Members for the wind energy sector included, inter alia , wind turbines, high -voltage 
power cables, structure s, electrical panel, electrical meters, and electrical transformers. Further 
goods mentioned included power converter s and generator s, control systems, electrical 
infrastructure, meteorological equipment, steel, and aluminium. One Member also mentioned the  
sub-components of wind turbine s, i.e. nacelle s, rotor s, and tower s.  
2.7.  Goods important for hydropower turbines mentioned by Members included, inter alia , control 
systems, high -voltage power cables, specialized maintenance equipment essential for the operati on 
of hydropower turbines  and generators, inlet valves, penstocks, intake gates, power transformers, 
auxiliary transformers, and AC generators .  
2.8.  Members also highlighted supply chain bottlenecks and barriers such as inadequate 
transportation infrastructure , global supply chain disruptions, limited suppliers of critical minerals, 
technical regulations, grid integration challenges such as variable power generation, technological 
limitations, and financing challenges for MSMEs. Other challenges also included delays or disruptions 
in receiving inputs for controls, automation devices, and other small subcomponents involving 
microchips. The role of trade policy in reduc ing tariffs and non -tariff barriers was also emphasiz ed 
by Members. For instance, Members noted that trade facilitation measures could streamlin e the 
movement of goods across borders by reducing bureaucratic hurdles and establishing clear and 
transparent guidelines for permits, certifications, and quality contr ol. The United Kingdom mentioned 
that it had conducted further value chain analysis on offshore wind turbines, which would be 
circulated in a technical paper to Members following the meeting.4 
Developing country perspectives   
2.9.  The United Nations Conference  on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) presented on 
opportunities for developing countries in renewable energy technologies, based on the " Technology 
and Innovation Report 2023: Opening green windows – Technological opportunities for a low -carbon 
world".5 Policy would be the main driver in opening green windows in developing countries and 
incentives would be necessary to support a green transition due to the possibilit y of market failures. 
Regarding international cooperation, the report called for consistency between the trade, Intellectual 
Property (IP) and climate change regimes; for greater flexibilities for developing countries regarding 
IP and green technologies; an d for flexibilities for developing countries in trade rules to foster infant 
green industries through tariffs, subsidies, and public procurement.  
2.10.  As part of the discussions, Members reacted to the presentation  and responded to the 
following  questions:  
• How can trade in goods and services help developing countries with access to and 
deployment of renewable energy technologies? What are the challenges and needs of 
developing countries and LDCs to use trade to develop the renewable energies?  
 
2.11.  Several Members a greed that a green transition was both necessary and beneficial for 
developing countries. Members also emphasized the role of the WTO in addressing barriers to trade 
in environmental goods and services like tariffs, technical standards, and labelling requi rements. A 
Member highlighted weak infrastructure and the lack of access to technology and expertise as 
barrier s to greater adoption of green technologies in developing economies . In response to a Member 
comment that the Report's recommendations appeared t o challenge  existing WTO rules , UNCTAD 
mentioned that the Report found that developing countries might require industrial policy to support 
their green transition and development of infant industries and recommended that efforts to align 
 
4 Offshore Wind Energy – Technical paper by the United Kingdom ( INF/TE/SSD/W/26 and 
INF/TE/SSD/W/26/Add.1) w as circulated on 23 May, adding to its technical paper "Building our Evidence Base 
around Environmental Goods" ( INF/TE/SSD/W/23 ) which provided a value chain analysis for solar PV modules . 
5 https://unctad.org/system/files/official -document/tir2023_en.pdf . INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 4 - 
  trade rules and co mmitments with international environmental agreements should be continued and 
strengthened .  
Analytical summary  
2.12.  The Facilitators introduced an Analytical Summary document (INF/TE/SSD/W/24) based on 
discussions at the previous meeting, which they considered  as a starting point towards a possible 
output of the Working Group by the end of the year. Several Members welcomed the summary 
document as a positive contribution, and expressed interest in providing written comments and 
engaging further.  
3  Working Group on Subsidies – 10 Ma y (p.m.)6 
3.1.  Presentations were made by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), 
China, the European Union, and Canada. The presentation by IISD focused on efforts to track public 
financial flows from fossil f uels to clean energy via the Energy Policy Tracker7, which covered policies 
affecting energy production and consumption for 38 economies and was an initiative of 29 expert 
organizations. IISD underscored the need to prioritize clean energy investments and  reforms in 
recovery plans, and to balance immediate crisis responses with longer term sustainability objectives.  
3.2.  China presented its Green Subsidy Policy aimed at promoting the green and low -carbon 
transition, focusing on the practice of competitive allo cation of fiscal funds. The presentation 
provided different examples of green subsidies policy that were considered important to support 
China's goals of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality, and for the green transformation of its 
economy  more generally . The competitive allocation of fiscal funds was introduced as an innovative 
approach to ensure the efficient and equitable distribution of funds.  
3.3.  The European Union presented on its policy support for the green transition. The EU Green 
Deal Industrial Plan  included the four pillars of: predictable regulations; increased investment for 
clean tech production; skills enhancement; and open trade. The EU's state aid framework and 
guidelines  ensured support for climate and environmental initiatives while adhering  to 
WTO-compatibility. The WTO's role in supporting climate neutrality would be through disciplines on 
subsidies, promoting green transition in a manner that minimi zed trade distortions , and as a forum 
for multilateral discussions on trade aspects of the g reen transition.  
3.4.  Canada presented on its Plan for Affordable Energy, Good Jobs, and a Growing Clean Economy 
as part of its 2023 federal budget. The budget plan proposed investments in clean growth of almost 
USD 21 billion over the next five  years and focu sed on securing global investment in the clean 
economy, with significant  funding allocated for clean electricity, clean economy growth, resilient 
infrastructure, and technological innovation. Three tiers of federal financial incentives (target ing 
programmi ng, strategic financing, and investment tax credits), underpinned by carbon pollution 
pricing and regulatory framework s, aimed to accelerate private investment.  
3.5.  As part of the discussions, Members reacted to the presentations and responded to the 
followin g questions:  
• How do you balance environmental and trade considerations when designing subsidies 
related to the low -carbon transition?  
 
• How do you consider possible trade impacts in the design of subsidies related to the 
low-carbon transition?  
 
• How can the environmental effects and trade impacts of such subsidies be identified?  
 
• What are information gaps to better understand these impacts, and how could transparency 
and data availability be enhanced?  
 
 
6 Fifteen  Members contributed to the discussions: Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Chile; Costa Rica; 
Ecuador; E uropean Union ; Norway; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Singapore; Sw itzerland; U nited Kingdom ; 
United States ; Uruguay.  
7 https://www.energypolicytracker.org/ . INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 5 - 
  3.6.  Members exchanged views on the presentations and shared their experiences on subsidy 
design, including environmental effects and trade impacts in the design and implementation of such 
subsidies. Several Members emphasized the importance of transparency in supporting greater 
predictability and greener economies, stressing the need to improve compliance with notification 
requirements under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. A Member also 
encouraged the sharing of best practices for subsid y design to enable Members to maximize 
environmental benefits while minimizing negative trade effects.  
3.7.  Members also emphasized the importance of consistency with WTO rules in designing subsidies, 
as well as the need to account for trade and environmental considerations. A Member stated that it 
utilized subsidies as incentives, along with regulatory measures, to promote private investments in 
sectors contributing to the global green transition, while another Member noted that it sought to 
minimize the trade-distorting impacts of green subsidies and support non -discriminatory support 
measures. Referring to a recent OECD synthesis report on government support to industrial sectors, 
one Member noted that market -pull incentives like carbon pricing and investment  tax credits were 
generally less distortive than subsidies that directly encouraged manufacturing capacity.    
3.8.  Further, Members shared concerns on the impact of market distortions, emphasized the need 
to progressively scale down subsidies, and noted the imp ortance of proportional and targeted 
measures, including those which related to greenhouse gas emissions. One Member underlined the 
need to comprehensively understand the effects of subsidy program mes on decarbonizing the global 
economy and expressed conce rns about potential market distortions caused by subsidies 
implemented by developed countries as well as the impact on developing countries' ability to pursue 
similar goals.  
4  Working Group on Trade -related Climate Measures (T rCMs) – 11 Ma y (a.m.)8 
Review o f carbon measurement standards and measures intended to lead to a reduction in carbon 
emissions related to fertilizer production  
4.1.  Presentations were made by the International Fertilizer Association (IFA), the WTO Secretariat, 
and the OECD. IFA's presentatio n focused on carbon footprint and decarbonization pathways of 
fertilizer production, including ongoing initiatives, policies, and technologies. IFA highlighted that 
countries should develop tailored local decarbonization roadmaps for their fertilizer indus try, and 
that the fertilizer, ammonia, and hydrogen industries were working towards developing harmonized 
carbon footprint standards and certifications. The WTO Secretariat provided an overview of global 
trends of trade in fertilizers, pointing to the decl ine in prices following record highs in 2022, the 
concentration of supply in fertilizers and related vulnerabilities, challenges for African LDCs to secure 
needed fertilizer imports, trade restrictions such as non -automatic licences and prohibitions, and 
ongoing work between the WTO and other international organizations on fertilizers and food security. 
The OECD presented on approaches to measur ing carbon footprints for food systems, pointing to 
challenges with emission measurements, public and private sect or pushes for greater environmental 
disclosure, a growing number of calculation tools, and increasing availability of data.  
4.2.  As part of the discussions, Members reacted to the presentations and responded to the 
following questions:  
• What trade -related clima te measures (TrCMs), including standards and regulations, are 
Members pursuing to support the decarbonization of fertilizer production? How can measures 
regarding the development of low -carbon hydrogen support the greening of ammonia 
production for nitroge n fertilizers?  
 
• What are the trade and climate implications of such measures?  
 
• How can Members best cooperate with the private sector and among each other, including 
at the WTO, to promote coherence and to maximize both climate and trade benefits?  
 
 
8 Thirteen Members contributed to the discussions: Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Colombia; 
European Union ; New Zealand; Norway; Paraguay; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; U nited Kingdom ; United States ; 
Uruguay.  INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 6 - 
  • What a re specific challenges facing developing countries in relation to decarbonizing fertilizer 
production and entering green value chains in this area? How can these be addressed: (i)  in 
the standards development stage; and (ii) in the implementation stage whe n measuring 
process and product emissions?  
 
4.3.  Members identified and discussed measures adopted to address the impacts of fertilizer 
production on emissions reduction. A few Members  stated that they did not have in place specific 
TrCMs targeted at the decarbonization of fertilizer production but had i mplemented or were in the 
process of implementing broader initiatives aimed at decarbonizing production methods, which 
would also apply to fertilizer production. Measures discussed included, inter alia , carbon pricing,  
border carbon adjustments, product standards,  regulations to reduce emissions from transportation, 
and funding for low -carbon technology research. One Member highlighted that its leading fertilizer 
producer was working towards decarbonizing the entire val ue chain for food, including transition ing 
to green and blue ammonia production.  
4.4.  The European Union mentioned  that its Emissions Trading System and Carbon Border 
Adjustment Mechanism both covered fertilizers, and aimed at reduc ing carbon emissions and 
addressing carbon leakage. A number of Members informed on their policies to promote low -carbon 
hydrogen, which would support the  production of green ammonia for nitrogen fertilizers . Singapore 
noted that its Green Economy Regulatory Initiative had been intro duced with the goal of support ing 
green growth opportunities and allow ing for trials of impactful green proposals, including on 
hydrogen, through regulatory 'sandboxes '. Australia mentioned that it was developing an 
internationally aligned guarantee of ori gin scheme for measure ment and verif ication of  carbon 
emissions of clean energy products , including  hydrogen and ammonia . Canada said that its Clean 
Fuel Standard  of 2020 set carbon intensity requirements for liquid , gaseous, and solid fuels, including 
ammonia , while its CAD$ 1.5 billion Zero-emissions Fuels Fund set up in  2020 support ed the 
production of low -carbon fuels, including hydrogen .  
4.5.  Members also identified the importance of emission measurement standards and noted the 
need for a bala nced and inclusive development of such standards based on international cooperation. 
They emphasized the need for greater cooperation between Members and the private sector through 
dialogue, knowledge sharing, capacity building, information exchange, techn ology transfer, and the 
development of guidelines and methodologies to promote coherence between climate policies and 
trade. One Member highlighted the importance of transparently notifying measures, proposed 
regulations, and technical standards to the WTO  since clean hydrogen was becom ing increasing ly 
used in industrial processes for fertilizer production. Members also discussed challenges faced by 
developing economies, expressed concerns that emission measurement standards could create 
non-tariff barriers  to trade and limit producers' competitiveness, and highlighted the need to 
enhance capacity and knowledge  in developing countries to address emissions challenges. Referring 
to the OECD presentation on carbon footprints for food systems, a few Members poin ted to the 
variability of emissions in agriculture, including for the cattle  sector , across countries due to 
differences in production techniques, and the need to facilitate measuring carbon in developing 
countries, while another Members underlined the  need to account for other countries' national efforts 
and circumstances when implementing unilateral measures against deforestation.  
Exchange on the development and implementation process of TrCMs 
4.6.  The Facilitators introduced  a document  titled "Member Practices in the Development of TrCMs " 
(INF/TE/SSD/W/25) , a compilation of statements by Members on their regulatory processes at the 
March meeting  of the Working Group on TrCMs . As part of the discussions, Members built on the 
practices shared at the previous meeting and responded to the following questions, which focused 
on transparency and consultation mechanisms as well as impact assessments : 
• What are the main transparency mechanisms employed by Members during the regulatory 
process when deve loping TrCMs, and during the implementation phase?  
 
• What are the main public consultation mechanisms employed by Members when developing 
TrCMs? What challenges, if any, do Members encounter in engaging with stakeholders in this 
area during the regulatory process? What stakeholder engagement practices are used by 
Members when developing and implementing TrCMs to ensure that the special needs and 
circumstances of developing Members are taken into account?  
 INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 7 - 
  • What challenges do developing Members face regarding  the engagement in consultation 
processes instituted by other Members or in obtaining necessary information from 
transparency mechanism, including at the WTO?  
 
• What processes do Members have in place to evaluate the impacts and effectiveness of 
TrCMs during their development (prior to adoption of the measure), and during their 
implementation (following adoption of the measure)?  
 
4.7.  In sharing their experiences on th e development and implementation process of TrCMs, some 
Members stated that TrCMs were treated like any other regulations, following regular legislative 
procedures. Members also noted that the mechanisms to develop TrCMs included public 
consultations, stak eholder engagement, impact assessment, establishment of expert groups and 
committees, and publication of draft regulations to promote transparency. One Member stated that 
it had introduced key performance indicator (KPI) targets using national and internat ional 
measurements and indices.  
4.8.  Members also emphasized the importance of transparency while developing TrCMs. Members 
encouraged international partners to participate in their consultation processes, and one Member 
invited other Members to participate in  an ongoing domestic consultation process regarding potential 
policy measures to mitigate carbon leakage risks and to support decarbonization such as border 
carbon adjustments, mandatory product standards, and embodied emissions reporting. A Member 
also op ined that the OECD Directorate for Public Governance's work on regulatory policy frameworks 
may be of relevance in developing TrCMs. Further, Members mentioned that stakeholder s in the 
various consultation processes included, inter alia , industry, environm ental groups, NGOs, and 
other s.  
Ongoing activities  
4.9.  The Forum on Trade, Environment and the SDGs (TESS)  briefed Members that it had assembled 
a group of 20 international legal experts to prepare a report on well -established principles of 
international law relevant to climate, environment, trade, and TrCMs. The forthcoming report aimed 
to identify principles and provide guidance on their application to the design and implementation of 
TrCMs and policies, and would be presented during the WTO Trade and Enviro nment Week in June.  
5  Working Group on Circular Economy – Circularity – 11 Ma y (p.m.)9 
Solar and wind energy  
5.1.  Presentations  were made by the Smart Prosperity Institute (SPI), the International Renewable 
Energy Agency (IRENA), and the company Ørsted. SPI pres ented on trade -related circular economy 
aspects of wind and solar energy, highlighting the need to clarify definitions and classifications for 
circular trade, to identify regulatory and technical barriers for growing circular trade and how trade 
agreements  or policies such as digital product passports could address those, as well as to build 
partnerships to facilitate trade and develop regional eco -systems for circular innovation, investment, 
and scale economies needed for the viability of recycling.  
5.2.  IRENA presented on end -of-life management of solar photovoltaics (PV) and the circular 
economy. It highlighted PV  recycling and potential new trade flo ws of raw materials, the role of 
standardization, and the importance of international collaboration and technical assistance, also with 
regard to maximizing benefits and avoiding potential negative environmental impacts of 
second -hand solar PV in developin g countries. Ørsted presented its activities on circularity of wind 
energy projects and related trade aspects along its strategic circularity  pillars – design and supply 
chain (minimizing input material, increasing  secondary inputs) ; late-life strategies ( repair, reuse, 
lifetime extension) ; and resource recovery (increasing recyclability). Ørsted also highlighted key 
challenges across all lifecycle stages to increase circularity in the renewable energy industry, such 
as establishing reliable second -hand mar kets.   
 
9 Eight Members contributed to the discussions: Canada; Chile; China; Costa Rica; E uropean Union ; 
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; U nited Kingdom ; United States .  INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 8 - 
  5.3.  As part of the discussions, Members reacted to the presentations and responded to the 
following questions:  
• What role does trade and trade policy play in Members' strategies and policies to promote 
circularity in solar and wind energy?  
  
• What opportunities exist for Members in WTO (in areas such as trade facilitation; technical 
regulations; labelling and certification; conformity assessment procedures; government 
support; or trade restrictions) to ensure and facilitate safe circular value chain s in solar and 
wind energy?  
 
• What trade policies, tools and collaborative actions could support developing and LDC 
Members in addressing challenges along the lifecycle of solar and wind energy?  
 
5.4.  Several Members acknowledged that trade could contribute to p romoting circularity, including 
by facilitating the reuse, repair, and recycling of goods and materials and promoting services that 
supported this. One Member stated that it promoted circularity by minimizing waste, reducing the 
need for new materials, and  utilizing trade agreements to encourage sustainable production 
practices in the renewable energy sector, while another Member highlighted that circular economy 
principles could result in reduced mining needs, promote reuse, repair, and recycling, and enha nce 
cooperation on standards and product recyclability. The European Union noted that it had proposed 
a Critical Raw Materials Act , which sought to ensure secure and sustainable access to critical raw 
materials.  
5.5.  Reducing tariffs and non -tariff barriers and  implementing fast -track governmental and custom 
procedures were raised as possible actions for facilitating a circular economy. Members also noted 
that trade policies could contribute to promoting design -for-repair, reuse, remanufacturing, and 
recycling. Consideration of trade -facilitative approaches for reverse supply chains and the alignment 
of international standards were also discussed, with some Members noting the role of the WTO 
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee in the development and uptak e of regulatory measures 
for a safe and circular supply chain. Members also noted that trade policies should be carefully 
designed to avoid encouraging unsustainable practices and instead incentivize circular economy 
solutions. Technical assistance, prefer ential market access, and access to finance were highlighted 
as supportive measures for developing countries. Members, including developing economies, stated 
that technical assistance and investments were particularly important for greater pro -circular 
technology adoption, and highlighted challenges related to recycling waste.  
Mapping exercise  
5.6.  The WTO Secretariat presented on the status of the mapping of measures contained in the 
Environmental Database (EDB) relat ing to circular economy as part of a broade r mapping ex ercise  
being undertaken in this Working Group. The draft mapping by the Secretariat identified 
440 measures from notifications and 218 measures from TPRs. Members appreciated the work done 
by the Secretariat  and welcomed a suggestion by the Facilitators to produce a draft document for 
the next TESSD Plenary Meeting in July, which would map the key trade  aspects of a circular 
economy based on the analysis by the Secretariat  as well as the work carried out so far by th is 
Working Group. Noting that Members would have several  opportunities to discuss the mapping 
document  before its finalization towards the e nd of the year , the Facilitators invited Members to 
provide comments on substance as well as to share their views on steps forward at the forthcoming 
Plenary meeting.  
Ongoing activities in other sectors  
5.7.  Several stakeholders briefed on ongoing activities r elated to circular economy. The 
United  Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) briefed about its work on trade and 
circular economy, including a recent study on integrating circular economy considerations into 
studies on regulatory and procedural ba rriers to trade.10 TESS presented on circular economy, trade 
and sustainable development in the textiles and clothing sector, highlighting sustainability challenges 
related to the fast fashion phenomenon, and pointing to trade -related issues and challenges  arising 
from supply chain traceability, standards and regulations , trade in second -hand textiles, extended 
 
10 https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2023 -05/ECE_CTCS_2023_06E.pdf . INF/TE/SSD/R/17  
- 9 - 
  producer responsibility or eco -design policies.  The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 
briefed the group on a new project that would look a t the export of used textiles from the 
European  Union and other developed countries to developing countries. Silverado briefed Members 
about a recent workshop on trade and circular economy and recommendations identified in support 
of the circular economy. The Friedrich -Ebert Stiftung and CUTS International informed  on a recent 
workshop on circular economy focusing on  value chains and challenges for developing countries. 
Finally, t he World Economic Forum (WEF) updated on its planned activities at the World C ircular 
Economy Forum 2023 in Helsinki, Finland (30  May-2 June).   
__________