. /.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/MA/W/3
3 July 2002
(02-3721)
Negotiating Group on Market Access Original:  English
NEGOTIATIONS ON ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 1 July 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
I. INTRODUCTION
1.   In the light of the responsibilities of the Committee on Trade and the Environment (CTE) in
Special Session and the Negotiating Group on Market Access, we present this initial contribution
identifying the issues to be considered in defining the scope of environmental goods subject to
negotiations and the negotiating process.  Given the nature of this issue, we are submitting this paper
to both the  Committee on Trade and the Environment in Special Session and the Non-Agricultural
Market Access Negotiating Group.
2.  Widespread application of environmental technologies is integral to maximizing the beneficial
effects of trade liberalization for the environment.  Trade initiatives to eliminate or reduce tariffs and
non-tariff barriers to trade in environmental goods will facilitate access to and encourage theutilization of environmental technologies which will in turn stimulate the development and
application of innovative solutions to environmental issues.  Developed and developing countries
alike enjoy comparative advantages in the production of environmental goods that can benefit from
greater market access.  This negotiation will simu ltaneously advance the commercial, environmental,
and development interests of all WTO Members, thereby producing a “win-win-win” outcome.
II. COORDINATION
3.   The Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment agreed at is first meeting on
March 22, 2002 that the negotiations on environmental goods should be conducted by the Market
Access Negotiating Group with continued coordination with the CTE, particularly on the concept of
goods (TN/TE/R/1).  The United States fully supports this decision and agrees the CTE should
provide regular input to the environmental goods negotiations.  In this regard, Members should submitpapers regarding environmental goods to both negotiating bodies and, as necessary, the Chairman of
the Market Access Negotiating Group should keep the CTE apprised of progress in the negotiations.
As appropriate, the CTE and Market Access Negotiating Group may also wish to meet jointly during
key periods of the negotiations.
III. DEFINING ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS
4.   As noted by New Zealand in a recent paper (TN/TE/W/6) submitted to the CTE, a substantial
amount of work to identify the scope of environmental goods has been done by APEC.   The United
States agrees the APEC product list is a useful c ontribution to help Members develop the scope of the
WTO negotiations.  However, given the evolutionary nature and speed with which advances occur inthe environmental goods sector, and the wider membership of the WTO, the Negotiating Group will
have to come to its own agreement on scope.  Th is will require  Members to consult with their
domestic industries, NGOs, and other interested stak eholders to identify new products that could beTN/MA/W/3
Page 2
included and to develop a WTO list.  Members should aim to finalize a common list of environmental
goods by the time the Market Access Negotiating Group agrees on modalities for the overall market
access negotiations.
5.   The APEC product classification process focused on end use (i.e., goods which are used to clean
the environment or to contain or prevent pollution) and related parts or components and also
considered certain alternative technologies, such as solar power equipment.  The United States
welcomes the views of Members regarding additional products that could be considered for inclusion
in the list for the non-agricultural market access negotiations; however, the APEC experience serves
as a useful guide.  While the United States encourages the production of goods in an environmentally
sound manner, using such a criterion as the basis for developing a list will pose difficulties of
definition.  Moreover, such a process risks prolonged discussions that could pit one Member’s viewsthat are based on their own environmental conditions, priorities, and values against those of another.
Finally,  production based criteria has the potential for erecting a new set of standards and/or customs
classifications, and Member’s ability to comply may differ substantially.
6.   Development of a list of environmental goods also could benefit from the work undertaken by the
OECD Joint Working Party on Trade and the Environment (JWPTE), which published in 2001 “The
Environmental Goods and Services Industry: Manual on Data Collection and Analysis.”  Accordingly,
the United States proposes that the OECD authors be  invited to brief the Market Access Negotiating
Group and CTE regarding its findings.
IV. REDUCTION OR ELIMINATION OF NON-TARIFF BARRIERS
7.   While reducing the cost of environmental goods through the elimination of tariffs is an important
means of making environmental goods more affordable and available, non-tariff barriers (NTBs) can
be equally or even more significant impediments to  trade in such goods.   Ministers recognized this
situation in both paragraph 16 and 31(iii) by also mandating the reduction or elimination of NTBs.  Asthe Market Access Negotiating Group considers the scope and process for addressing NTBs, it may
wish to consider whether a separate examination of NTBs affecting environmental goods is
warranted.
8.   In this regard the United States notes the work already undertaken by the OECD’s JWPTE
warrants further analysis and may serve as a useful basis for identifying the types of NTBs currently
faced by environmental goods.  To the extent they are not covered generally by other disciplines orwithin the context of the new market access negotiations, Members should establish a mechanism for
dealing with NTBs on environmental goods specific ally, including through bilateral negotiations.
V. CONCLUSION
9.   The CTE and Market Access Negotiating Group should maintain close coordination as the
negotiations proceed.   Market access negotiators should endeavour, as a first step, to agree on a
common list of environmental goods that would be subject to negotiations, taking advantage of  
work
already conducted in other fora.  The negotiations also should seek to address non-tariff barriers in
general and those that correspond to environmental goods in particular.
__________