WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/14 
28 November 2005 
 (05-5637) 
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 purpose of this report is to provide the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) with an 
overview of the progress made in the trade and e nvironment negotiations und er Paragraph 31 of the 
Doha Ministerial Declaration up to the time of the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.
1   
I. STATUS OF WORK 
A. PARAGRAPH 31(I)  
2. In Paragraph 31(i), participants are instructed to negotiate on: "the relationship between 
existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in multilateral environmental agreements 
(MEAs).  The negotiations shall be  limited in scope to the applicability of such existing WTO rules as 
among parties to the MEA in question.  The negotiations shall not prejudice the WTO rights of any Member that is not a party to the MEA in question."  
3. There has been serious engagement on the part of all delegations in the discussions on this 
part of the mandate.  Since the early stages of  the negotiations, two main approaches have been 
followed under Paragraph 31(i), namely:   the id entification and discussion of specific trade 
obligations (STOs) set out in MEAs;  and a broade r and more conceptual approach to the WTO-MEA 
relationship.  These approaches to the mandate ha ve been pursued in parallel, and have both 
contributed to enriching the debate in the Committee.   
4. In a preliminary phase of the discussions, Memb ers focused on some of the terms of the 
mandate.  In this context, some delegations shar ed their interpretation of the terms "multilateral 
environmental agreement";  "specific trade obligation" ;  "as among parties to the MEA";  etc.  With 
respect to the definition of "specific trade obligatio n", Members have examined various types of trade 
measures set out in a number of MEAs, and how these measures may qualify as STOs for the purpose 
of the mandate.
2  In this context, it has been suggest ed that specific trade obligations included 
measures that were explicitly provided for and mandatory under MEAs.  Some Members, however, 
considered that other types of trade meas ures may also be considered as STOs.   
5. The identification of STOs set out in MEAs le d subsequently to a discussion of national 
experiences in the negotiation and implementation of ME As.  It has been argued in this context that 
information on coordination and info rmation exchange at the national level could provide insight into 
measures for ensuring coherence between trade and envi ronmental policies at the international level.   
6. Differences have emerged from the beginning of  the discussions under Paragraph 31(i) over 
the issue of an outcome for the negotiations.  So me of the proposals submitted by Members have 
                                                      
1 See document TN/TE/INF/4/Rev.8, dated 25 November 2005, for a full list of the submissions made.  
2 The Secretariat Note entitled " Matrix on Trade Measures Pursuant to Selected Multilateral 
Environmental Agreements " in document TN/TE/S/5/Rev.1, was used as a reference for this discussion.   TN/TE/14 
Page 2  
 
addressed this particular issue, focusing, for instan ce, on the need to develop certain "principles and 
parameters" to govern the WTO-MEA relationship, su ch as the principles of no hierarchy, mutual 
supportiveness and deference between the trade and e nvironment regimes.  The delegations that have 
put forward these proposals are of the view that the WTO-MEA relationship could be further clarified and improved.   
7. Several other delegations indicated that the ma ndate was more limited in scope, and did not 
extend to the general WTO-MEA relationship.  In their view, the mandate is circumscribed to a 
specific aspect of this relationship, as it focuses on existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations 
set out in MEAs.  Furthermore, the mandate clearly states that the negotiations are limited in scope to 
the applicability of WTO rules as among parties to the MEA, and shall not prejudice the WTO rights 
of any Member that is not a party to the MEA.  For these delegations, the WTO-MEA relationship has 
proved to be working well, and the experience to date does not support the need for further 
clarification to ensure the mutual supportiven ess of the trade and environment regimes.   
8. Despite the extensive discussions held under Para graph 31(i), much work still remains to be 
done.  In order to make progress in the negotiations in 2006, Members will have to take stock of their 
discussions to date and engage in substantive work, with the objective of reaching a desirable 
outcome and fulfilling the mandate.   
B. P
ARAGRAPH 31(II)  
9. The mandate of Paragraph 31(ii) stipulat es that participants shall negotiate: "procedures for 
regular information exchange between MEA Secret ariats and the relevant WTO committees, and the 
criteria for the granting of observer status."   This mandate therefore has two main components, 
namely information exchange between WTO and ME A secretariats, and criteria for the granting of 
observer status.   
10. With respect to information exchange, the proposals tabled by Members have explored how 
existing practices can be complemented or furthe r improved upon by other forms of cooperation.  
It has been suggested that some of the existing mechanisms already in place to facilitate information 
exchange between the WTO, UNEP and MEAs coul d be formalized or further consolidated.3   
11. The suggestions and ideas put forward were su mmarized by the Chairperson of the CTESS in 
her Report to the TNC in July 2003.4  These include, for instance:  formalizing MEA Information 
Sessions in the CTE, and organizing them on a re gular basis;  holding ME A Information Sessions on 
specific themes by grouping the MEAs that share a common interest;  organizing meetings with 
MEAs in other WTO bodies, either together wi th the CTE or separately;  organizing more 
systematically WTO parallel events at MEA Meetings of Parties;  organizing joint WTO, UNEP and 
MEA technical assistance and capacity building pr ojects;  promoting the exchange of documents, 
while respecting confidential information; crea ting avenues for information exchange between 
government representatives from the trade and envi ronment sides;  and establishing an electronic 
database on trade and environment.  These suggesti ons could be taken up by Members as a basis for 
further discussion.   
12. Some delegations have expressed the view th at enhanced cooperation between the WTO and 
MEA secretariats could contribute to improving both  international and national coordination, and 
could further contribute to conflict prevention between  the trade and environment regimes.  In this 
regard, it has been suggested that an outcome unde r Paragraph 31(ii) could go some way in addressing 
                                                      
3 See " Existing Forms of Cooperation and Information Exchange between UNEP/MEAs and the WTO 
– Note by the Secretariat " circulated in document TN/TE/S/2/Rev.1.   
4 TN/TE/7.    TN/TE/14 
 Page 3 
 
 
the mandate under Paragraph 31(i).  Members may wi sh to further explore the synergies between 
Paragraphs 31(i) and (ii) in light of th eir relevance to the WTO-MEA interface.   
13. With regard to observer status, it has been sugg ested that the general criteria pertaining to the 
granting of observer status to international inter governmental organizations contained in Annex 3 of 
the Rules of Procedure of the General Council coul d provide a basis for discussing specific criteria for 
MEA observership.5  Further discussions are therefore called for, including on the WTO bodies that 
could benefit from greater in teraction with MEAs.   
14. I would encourage delegations to try and make concrete pr ogress in pursuing their work on 
this aspect of the mandate, notwithstanding the fa ct that substantive discussions on the issue of 
observer status are pending in other bodies of the WTO.   
15. Finally, I would like to note the valuable c ontribution of the MEAs and other international 
organizations which have been inv ited to participate on an ad hoc basis in the deliberations of the 
CTESS.6  Given the relevance of the work of these organizations to the discussions in the CTESS 
with respect to all aspects of the mandate in Paragr aph 31, I encourage Members to continue to extend 
these ad hoc invitations.   
C. PARAGRAPH 31(III) 
16. The mandate in Paragraph 31(iii)  calls for negotiations on " the reduction or, as appropriate, 
elimination of tariff and non-tariff barri ers to environmental goods and services ".  After the 
reaffirmation by Members of their commitment to  make progress in the negotiations on trade and 
environment in July 2004, the CTESS devoted more time to the discussion of this subject.  Efforts 
were made to develop a more in -depth understanding of the issues before the CTESS, especially with 
regard to environmental goods.  Discussions of a tec hnical nature were held at the formal meetings, 
as well as at informal information exchange sessions organized in the latter half of 2005.  However, 
so far, the CTESS has not reached a common understa nding of how it should proceed to the next stage 
of work to fulfil the mandate.   
17. Different approaches to Paragraph 31(iii) nego tiations have emerged from the submissions 
made to date.  In the initial phase of negotiations , discussions in the CTESS, based on submissions by 
a number of Members, revolved around the iden tification of environmental goods for the 
establishment of a multilaterally agreed list.  Howeve r, in early 2005, an alternative approach to 
negotiations was proposed by one delegation, descr ibed as the "Environmental Project Approach".  
Another delegation came forward with a proposal fo r an "integrated approach" to the negotiations, 
which combines some of the elements of the pr evious two approaches.  Furthermore, other 
delegations have made contributions that focu sed on developing countries' interests in the 
negotiations.  The challenge before the CTESS is  to find common ground between these different 
approaches and other approaches that may be developed.   
                                                      
5 Rules of Procedure for Sessions of the Ministeria l Conference and Meetings of the General Council , 
WT/L/161, 25 July 1996.   
6 The following organizations have been invited to attend the meetings of the CTESS on an ad hoc 
basis:  the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and their Disposal, the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Rotte rdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent 
Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemi cals and Pesticides in International Trade, the Stockholm Convention on 
Persistent Organic Pollutants, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations 
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the World Customs Organization (WCO), and the 
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).    TN/TE/14 
Page 4  
 
18. At present, the CTESS has before it nine initial lists of environmental goods.  The products 
included in the individual lists have been  compiled in Annex II to the Secretariat's Synthesis of 
Submissions on Environmental Goods .
7  In the preparation of their list, Members have used different 
parameters and categories of environmental products.   
19. Some Members have also adva nced ideas on the possible structure of an environmental goods 
list by suggesting the development of a "living list" th at could be updated in future to incorporate new 
products, so as to reflect the reality of the evol ution of environmental goods as well as technological 
change.  Another proposal discussed suggested the creation of two lists, a core and a complementary list, involving different sets of commitments.   
20. While there appear to be some elements of  convergence among the existing lists, there would 
need to be an intensification of the analytical and technical work if the proponents of the lists were to 
address the question of developing a consolidated set  of environmental goods for the consideration of 
the CTESS.   
21. Under the "Environmental Project Approach", it was proposed that Members would identify, 
at the national level, the environmental goods and ser vices that they wish to liberalize for the purposes 
of environmental projects.  Such projects, aimed at meeting national environmental objectives, would 
be subject to approval by a Designated National Authority (DNA).  The goods and services included 
in the approved project would qualify for specified  concessions for the duration of the project.  The 
broad criteria for selecting these "environmental proj ects" could be agreed upon in the CTESS with 
due consideration to the policy sp ace of national governments.   
22. Finally, the "Integrated Approach" was presente d as an attempt to bring together elements 
from the previous two approaches.  In order to be nefit from liberalization under Paragraph 31(iii), the 
goods would have to be included in one of the enviro nmental project categories to be identified by the 
CTESS.  The application of tariff and non-tariff concessions granted by the importing Member would 
cover the period of project implementation.   
23. Pursuant to the objective of enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment in 
the chapeau of Paragraph 31, whatever the a pproach supported by Members, their general 
consideration in the negotiations unde r Paragraph 31(iii) has been to reach a triple-win outcome that 
would deliver benefits from the perspectives of  trade, the environment and development.  
24. While there remain differences of opinion among Members on the issue of approach, it 
emerged from the discussion that there were some underlying questions common to the list, 
environmental project and integrated approaches, wh ich delegations could usefully address in order to 
make some further progress in their work.  In the latter half of 2005, delega tions have engaged in 
technical discussions with a practical focus on the potential environmental attributes of individual products or groups of products, based on concrete  examples and case studies.  National experiences 
were also shared with respect to the implementation of environmental projects.  It is hoped that this 
process will contribute to sketching out areas of commonality, in order to proceed further in the 
negotiations under Paragraph 31(iii).   
25. There is still, at this stage, a divergence of views as to how the work should be carried out 
after the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  Th ere are Members who would wish to see the work 
continue towards developing a common understanding of the different approaches to the negotiations.  
There are other Members who consider that the main  work in this area is to identify environmental 
goods, and who would like this work to be completed in 2006.  It is clear that there is a need for 
convergence if the negotiations are to  advance on substantive issues.  
                                                     
 
7 This Note is contained in document TN/TE/W/63.    TN/TE/14 
 Page 5 
 
 
26. Members have noted that there is some degree of overlap in the mandate of the CTESS and 
those of other relevant negotiating groups.  It has also been noted that, within the respective mandates 
of these bodies, Members have given some co nsideration to the issues of relevance under 
Paragraph 31(iii).  In the next  phase of the CTESS's work, increased information flow between the 
relevant negotiating groups w ill be crucial to fulfilling the Paragraph 31(iii) mandate in a 
comprehensive manner.   
II. CONCLUSION 
27. I welcome the recent call by Members to inte nsify the negotiations.  After the Hong Kong 
Ministerial Conference, it will be important to c onsult with delegations on how to structure the 
CTESS deliberations so as to enable Members to enga ge substantively on all parts of the mandate.  
The fulfilment of the mandate under Paragraph 31 a nd the completion of the negotiations within the 
overall time-frame for the conclusion of the R ound is the ultimate objective for us all.   
 
__________