WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/W/70 
20 February 2007 
 (07-0697) 
Committee on Trade and Environment  
Special Session Original:   English 
 
 
 
CONTINUED WORK UNDER PARAGRAPH 31(II) 
OF THE DOHA MINIST ERIAL DECLARATION 
 
Communication from the United States  
 
Paragraph 31(ii ) 
   The following communication, dated 19 February 2007, is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegation of the United States. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. The United States reiterates its commitment to th e very important objective of enhancing the 
mutual supportiveness of trade and environment, and its view that the Committee on Trade and Environment Special Session (CTESS) has an opport unity to make concrete progress toward this 
objective under paragraph 31(ii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.  Discussions under 
paragraph 31(ii) have been less inte nse than under other sub-paragra phs, and much work needs to be 
done.   
2. The United States submitted a paper to the Co mmittee in June 2002 (TN/TE/W/5) setting out 
ideas to improve cooperation between WTO bodi es and Multilateral Environmental Agreement 
(MEA) secretariats in two main areas:  informati on exchange and observer status.  We now welcome 
renewed discussion of this and other proposals,  including those by the European Communities 
(TN/TE/W/15, TN/TE/W/39 and TN/TE/W/66) and Switzerland (TN/TE/W/30), and the many other 
views and ideas put forward by Members concerning paragraph 31(ii), which are helpfully compiled 
in the Secretariat’s synthesis document (JOB(07)/2).  In this paper, the United States has attempted to 
elaborate on the ideas set forth in our earlier paper, as well as provide an outline of concrete elements 
that could form an eventual result under the paragraph 31(ii) mandate (see Annex I).  
II. INFORMATION EXCHANGE 
3. As proposed in the United States' earlier submis sion, concrete action can be taken under the 
mandate of paragraph 31(ii) to improve cooperation between MEA secretariats and relevant WTO 
bodies in the realm of information exchange.   
A. I
NFORMATION SESSIONS  
4. The U.S. delegation, among others, consider s that information sessions involving MEA 
secretariats are important and should become a form al, institutionalized aspect of the CTE meeting in 
regular session (CTE).  The United States also agrees  with others that procedures for these sessions do TN/TE/W/70 
Page 2  
 
  not need to be overly detailed and should remain fl exible.  However, it would be useful for Members 
to agree on a general structure for condu cting future information sessions.   
5. In an effort to set forth the outlines of a ge neral structure, the United States proposes that 
MEA information sessions within the CTE take pl ace on a regular basis.  Initially, information 
sessions should be held once a year.  After three to five years, Members should take stock of this 
practice to see whether they are reaping benefits expected from formalizing the information exchange 
process.  During such a stock-taking exercise, Member s could consider whether it is desirable to hold 
information sessions more or less often. 
6. These information sessions should involve a two-wa y flow of information so that the WTO 
Members and Secretariat learn about trade-relate d MEA activities and rules while MEA secretariats 
and delegates become better apprised of a trade-re lated perspective and issues arising under the WTO 
Agreement.   To this end, officials from Member  governments, including those that regularly attend 
the CTE and any other relevant WTO bodies, ME A secretariats and delegates, and the WTO 
Secretariat could attend these information sessions.  The sessions should be timed strategically, so that as many delegates and relevant MEA secretariats as possible have an opportunity to participate.  The 
timing of information sessions shoul d be coordinated with MEA secr etariats and, to the extent 
practicable, take into account relevant MEA meetings , to facilitate active participation by relevant 
MEA secretariats and delegates.   
7. The United States also recommends that the C TE agree in advance on a topic or mix of 
themes for the information session.  We agree with othe rs that it is important to have sessions that are 
well organized on topics of broad current interest to  Members, with useful, brief background papers 
prepared and distributed in advance by the WTO a nd MEA secretariats.  For example, in the past, 
information sessions have focused on cross-cutting issues (such as the 2001 themes of compliance and 
dispute settlement) that are likely to be of interest to many or all MEAs.  Sessions could also cover 
substantive issues that are particularly oriented towa rd the subject area of a cluster of MEAs (such as 
hazardous chemicals with respect to the Basel-PIC-POPs cluster).     
8. In addition to formal information sessions , we have proposed that the CTESS also 
explore other mechanisms for collaboration.  Th e WTO Secretariat is already coordinating its 
technical assistance activities to allow for participation by relevant MEA secretariats.  
We agree with others that this should conti nue, and the WTO Secretariat, along with relevant 
MEA secretariats, should focus mo re assistance to help build the capacity of developing 
country Members to foster their own internal , national trade and e nvironment coordination 
processes.   
B. DOCUMENT EXCHANGE  
9. The United States appreciates that an incr easing number of WTO documents are submitted 
and circulated on an unrestricted basis and made accessible to MEA secretariats and the general 
public through the WTO’s public Document Dissem ination Facility (DDF).  We look forward to 
continuing improvements in WTO transparency and welcome the recent decision by the General Council to improve document derestriction practices and expand the category of unrestricted 
documents.   
10. In this area, as in others, we stress that do cument exchange between each Member’s trade and 
environment officials should occur, in the first in stance, at the domestic le vel.  The best way for 
Member government environment officials and expe rts to learn of relevant WTO documents is 
directly from their own government’s trade counter parts, and vice versa, through internal trade and 
environment coordination procedures at the national le vel.  Each Member can benefit by fostering its  TN/TE/W/70 
 Page 3 
 
 
  own internal communications links to enable su ch coordination.  While improved information 
exchange between WTO committees and MEA secretariats  is important, it would be a mistake to rely 
exclusively on the MEA or WTO secretariat as the primary source for such material.  
11. In order to complement domestic document-sh aring procedures, MEA secretariats could 
transmit to the WTO Secretariat relevant reports and other documentation prepared by them or 
submitted by parties to these agreements.  Examples  could include party reports under Article 10(2) of 
the Rotterdam Convention (i.e., import responses to proposed exports of chemicals) and reports on 
certifications received from importing non-parties under the Stockholm (POPs) Convention.  The WTO Secretariat could index documentation it has received from MEAs for the information of 
WTO Members.  For example, the WTO Secretariat could issue a list of MEA-related reports or 
documentation that it has received on an annual basis.  And for its part, an MEA Secretariat could be 
invited to prepare an index of documents it h as received from the WTO Secretariat in order to 
facilitate access to such documents by MEA delegates and secretariat staff. 
12. In addition, the United States agrees with other Me mbers that the Internet affords an excellent 
mechanism to enhance information exchange between the WTO and MEAs.  The WTO and its 
Members should look for ways to utilize the Inte rnet to promote improved information exchange.  
WTO and MEA secretariats should take full adva ntage of hyperlinking and other tools to 
cross-reference, and make readily available online, relevant materials.  
III. OBSERVER STATUS 
13. As noted on previous occasions, the mandate of paragraph 31(ii) concerning criteria for 
granting observer status is limited to the question of  observer status for relevant MEA secretariats.  
The mandate does not extend to the more general issue of observer status in the WTO.  That 
responsibility lies exclusively with the WTO General Council.  Also, as the United States has previously noted, negotiations pursuant to paragr aph 31(ii) take place against the backdrop of the 
existing Rules of Procedure for Sessions of the Mi nisterial Conference and Meetings of the General 
Council (WT/L/161).  This specifically includes Annex 3, which addresses Observer Status for 
International Intergovernmental Organizations in the WTO.   
14. Accordingly, Annex 3 can and should provide cr itical context to inform our discussions and 
ultimate decision on the criteria used  to grant observer status to relevant MEA secretariats.  Annex 3 
provides for each WTO body to consider, on a case- by-case basis, requests for observer status from 
organizations that have “competence” and a “direct interest” in trade policy matters.  To assist in determining whether an organization meets these requ irements, Annex 3 provides an illustrative list of 
factors that may be taken into account, including:    
• the nature of work of the organization requesting observer status;  
• the nature of the organization’s membership;  
• the number of WTO Members in the organization;  
• reciprocity with respect to access to proceedings, documents, and other aspects of 
observer status; and  
• whether the organization has been associated  in the past with the work of the 
Contracting Parties to GATT 1947. 
 
15. The CTESS has been tasked with negotiating “the criteria for the granting of observer status,” 
that is, specific criteria that could identify relevant  MEAs that might be invited to participate as an 
observer in a WTO body.  Contrary to some vi ews expressed, the CTESS has not been tasked, nor 
does it have the authority, to decide on which par ticular MEAs should be granted observer status in 
the CTE regular session or other WTO bodies.  TN/TE/W/70 
Page 4  
 
  16. The United States is among many Members advocati ng that criteria be flexible.  Such criteria 
should help facilitate WTO bodies’ consideration of whether an MEA requesting observership has 
“competence” and a “direct interest” in its work.  Criteria should not be so inflexible as to make it more difficult for an MEA secretariat to gain observership to a relevant WTO body.   
17. Therefore, the United States proposes that  the CTESS develop a non-exhaustive list of 
“indicative questions” to aid WTO bodies in making reasoned decisions on a case-by-case (i.e., WTO 
body-by-body and MEA-by-MEA) basis regarding MEA observer status.  Such indicative questions would use the non-exhaustive list of factors identifie d as potentially relevant in Annex 3 of the WTO 
Rules of Procedure as their point of departure.  This approach is flexible enough to deal with new MEAs that may apply for obser ver status in the future. 
18. The United States proposes the following indica tive questions as a basis for discussion:  
• Does the MEA contain specific trade obligati ons or other trade-related obligations 
among Parties, and if so, are these specifica lly relevant to the WTO body’s scope of 
work? 
  
• Is the MEA currently an observer to other WTO bodies, and if so, what is the extent 
of the MEA’s participation in meetings of that body? 
 
• Does the WTO Secretariat participate in th e MEA meetings as an observer?  If so, 
does the participation relate to issu es addressed by the relevant WTO body? 
 
• Have the WTO Secretariat and the MEA Secretariat worked together on reports or to 
plan workshops, capacity build ing events, or seminars?  
 
19. These indicative questions, while by no means exhaustive, could help form a basis for a WTO 
body to determine if a particular MEA has a “direct interest” in matters before that body.  Individual 
WTO bodies could be invited to add to or subtract fro m this set of indicative questions, as appropriate.   
20. The United States also proposes that  in the event that a decision cannot be arrived at with 
respect to a particular, yet relevant, MEA observer request, WTO bodies could be encouraged to invite that relevant MEA to participate as an ob server on an ad hoc basis, or for a period to be 
determined by the WTO body, and subject to ex tension as circumstances warrant.  Such ad hoc 
observership could facilitate  information exchange.  
21. In addition to the CTESS undertak ing to develop and agree on a set of indicative questions to 
guide WTO bodies considering observer requests fro m MEA secretariats, the United States proposes 
that the CTESS grant permanent observer status fo r the remainder of the DDA negotiations to the 
seven MEA secretariats
1 that currently have ad hoc observership. 
                                                      
1 The Basel Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species, the Montreal Protocol on Su bstances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, the Rotterdam 
Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in 
International Trade, the Stockholm Convention on Pe rsistent Organic Pollutants, and the United Nations 
Framework Convention on Climate Change.   
   TN/TE/W/70 
 Page 5 
 
 
  IV. SUMMARY AND GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 
22. These proposals regarding information exchange and observer status have the potential to 
enhance mutually supportive relations between the multilateral trading system and MEAs and, in so 
doing, to further the achievement of sustainable development goals.   
23. While this kind of enhanced international coordi nation is undoubtedly useful and important, it 
does not take the place of the much more direct and efficient means of intra -governmental 
coordination that should take place on an ongoing basis at the national level between trade and 
environment officials of each WTO Member.  It is the U.S. view that the interests of Members would be best served if they allow improved secretariat- to-secretariat cooperation a nd information exchange 
to supplement , rather than substitute for, direct communi cation, information sharing and collaboration 
within the Member’s  government.  As mentioned by a number of Members, institutional technical 
assistance and capacity building along these lines could be helpful to governments as they strive to 
achieve better domestic coordination. 
24. The United States believes that, if adopted, these information exchange proposals, together 
with the development of a flexible set of i ndicative questions for considering and granting 
observership would help facilitate MEA secretariats ’ keeping up to date on relevant WTO work, and 
enhance the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. 
25. The United States reaffirms the importance of achieving a productive and meaningful 
outcome to the paragraph 31(ii) negotiations.  We appreciate the papers and the many ideas and 
proposals put forward by other Members under this paragraph, and we hope that these contributions 
will contribute to a revitalized discussion unde r paragraph 31(ii) of the Doha mandate.  
26. An outline of this paper’s proposals is set out in Annex I.   TN/TE/W/70 
Page 6  
 
  ANNEX I 
 
OUTLINE OF U.S. 31(ii) PROPOSALS 
 
 
I. INFORMATION EXCHANGE 
A. Information Sessions:  Agree a general structure for information sessions with MEA 
secretariats.  
(i) Hold information sessions annually w ith stock-taking after 3-5 years. 
(ii) Coordinate timing with relevant MEA secr etariats to the extent practicable. 
(iii) Agree in advance on a theme/topic for information session. 
(iv) WTO and MEA secretariats prepare brie f background papers in advance. 
   
B. Document Exchange   
 
(i) Reaffirm the need to share documents at th e domestic level as first-best way to inform 
trade and environment officials of WTO and MEA activities.  
(ii) Continue to improve WTO transparency, including through document derestriction 
practices and expanding the categor y of unrestricted documents.   
(iii) Improve document indexing practices, including WTO and MEA secretariats posting 
a list of documentation received fro m each other on an annual basis. 
(iv) Encourage use of the Internet (includi ng hyperlinking) to promote information 
exchange. 
C. Technical Assistance and Capacity Building 
 
(i) WTO and MEA Secretariats continue to coordinate technical assistance and capacity 
building activities. 
(ii) Explore ways to foster better domestic trade and environment coordination processes 
and information sharing procedures in developing countries.   
II. OBSERVER STATUS 
A. Reaffirm the following:  
 
(i) mandate is limited to observer status fo r relevant MEA secretariats and does not 
extend to general issue of observer status in WTO;  
(ii) applicability of existing Rules of Procedure (WT/L/161), specifically Annex 3; and 
(iii) observer status is decided on a council or committee basis.  TN/TE/W/70 
 Page 7 
 
 
   
B. Agree on a flexible set of indicative questi ons that can assist WTO bodies in considering 
MEA observer requests [to be developed by CTESS in advance of their use]. 
 C. Recommend that in the event that a decisi on cannot be reached on an MEA observer request, 
WTO bodies be encouraged to invite that MEA to relevant meetings on an ad hoc basis. 
 D. Agree to grant permanent observer status fo r the remainder of the DDA negotiations to the 
seven MEA secretariats that currently have ad hoc observer status.  
__________