. /.  
 WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/11 
14 March 2005 
 
 (05-1066) 
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 eleventh meeting of the Committee on Trade and Environment in Special Session 
(CTESS) was held on 24-25 February 2005. 
I. STATUS OF WORK 
2. Under Paragraph 31(i) of the mandate, dele gations continued to share their national 
experiences in the negotiation and implementation of  multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs).  
Canada, in particular, presented its  inter-departmental coordination and consultation mechanisms that 
were designed to ensure a harmonious MEA-WTO relati onship.  It was of the view that the following 
criteria had to guide MEA negotiators:  (1) MEAs had to be open to all countries;  (2) they had to 
reflect broad-based support;  (3) their trade measures ha d to be drafted with precision;  (4) they had to 
treat non-parties on the same basis as parties, if the non-parties complied with their provisions; and 
(5) they had to explicitly consider WTO principles.   A number of delegations welcomed the national 
experience-sharing exercise, and the general aim of  preventing conflict between the WTO and MEAs.  
Delegations were encouraged to share their nationa l experiences in writing whenever possible, so that 
a fruitful exchange could take place. 
3. Under Paragraph 31(ii) of the mandate, a numbe r of delegations suggested that the ideas 
developed by the CTESS on how to further MEA- WTO Secretariat cooperation and information 
exchange (contained in document TN/TE/7), be expl ored in greater detail.  Made available to 
delegations at this meeting was an update of a WTO Secretariat No te on existing forms of cooperation 
and information exchange (TN/TE/S/2).  Certain criter ia for the granting of observer status were also 
debated. 
4. Under Paragraph 31(iii) of the mandate, new subm issions were tabled by New Zealand, Korea 
and the European Communities (EC).  The New Zealand submission called for a practical approach to 
the negotiations, in which Members could "define [environmental goods] by doing," and suggested that certain reference points guide the identifica tion of environmental pr oducts.  It expressed a 
preference for the adoption of a "single consensus list" of environmental goods, but stated that a dual-list approach could be considered in the event that agreement on one list could not be obtained.  
Furthermore, the paper suggested the concept of a " living list," which would allow an agreed list to be 
updated for technological progress.   
5. The EC submission called for the use of certain "guiding principles" in the identification of 
environmental goods, and proposed that environmen tal goods include:  (1) goods used in pollution 
control and resource management, and (2) goods that  have a high environmen tal performance or low 
environmental impact.  Under each of these categories, a list of examples was provided.  The paper 
also commented on the modalities for the negotia tions, calling on all Members, except the least 
developed, to agree to "deeper tariff cuts" in this area of the negotiations. TN/TE/11 
Page 2  
 
6. The Korean submission presented Korea's initia l list of environmental goods, which was 
created on the basis of criteria viewed by Kor ea as practical, and which "could be broadly accepted 
and applied by WTO Members." It was understood th at there could be additions to this list.  
7. In the discussion on Paragraph 31(iii), several  developing country Members emphasized the 
need for balance in the negotiations between de veloped and developing c ountry interests.  In 
particular, they urged that the issues of special a nd differential treatment, of technical assistance, and 
of transfer of technology be considered.  Furthermore, discussion was held on some of the factors on which the identification of environmental goods coul d be based.  Some de veloping country Members 
indicated that they would also be submitting lists of environmental goods. 
II. FUTURE WORK 
8. In keeping with the directions provided at th e TNC meeting of February 2005, an informal 
meeting on delegations' expectations for the H ong Kong Ministerial Conference was convened.  
While it was clear that all parts of the Paragraph 31 mandate were important and required delegations' 
serious attention, Paragraph 31(iii) emerged as the most likely candidate for tangible progress by the 
Hong Kong Ministerial Conference.  There was a ge neral view that, as a potential outcome for the 
Conference, delegations could prepare a list of environmental goods.  In that regard, I have 
encouraged them to continue submitting their ideas,  as well as their lists of goods, for Members' 
consideration. 
__________