WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/W/72/Rev.1 
7 May 2007 
 
 (07-1898) 
Committee on Trade and Environment 
Special Session Original:   English 
 
 
 
PROPOSAL FOR AN OUTCOME ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT CONCERNING 
PARAGRAPH 31(I) OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
 
Submission from Australia and Argentina  
 
Paragraph 31(i)  
 
Revision  
 
 
 The following communication is being circulated at the request of the Delegations of Australia and Argentina.  
_______________ 
 
 
1. Paragraph 31(i) of the Doha Declaration manda tes negotiations on the relationship between 
existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in multilateral environmental agreements 
(MEAs).  The negotiations are specifically limited in  scope to the applicability of such existing WTO 
rules as among parties to the MEA in question.  The mandate also provides that the negotiations 
should not prejudice the WTO rights of any Member that is not a party to the MEA in question. 
 2. Australia believes that a practical outcome shoul d be pursued under Paragraph 31(i), one that 
accurately reflects our discussions and experiences in the CTESS.  We suggest that a short but 
substantive report be prepared highlighting ke y observations from CTESS discussions, and setting out 
areas of agreement and recommendations. 
 
3. In our view, such a report should highlight both the process and content of the CTESS’ 
discussions under Paragraph 31(i).  The report wo uld outline the three-phased approach that the 
CTESS decided to pursue in the negotiations.  Sp ecifically, this approach involved firstly, the 
identification of the "specific trade obligations in  multilateral environmental agreements" which were 
the subject of the mandate.  The second phase focu sed on whether there have been particular 
implementation issues with these "specific trade ob ligations", including through sharing of national 
experiences among Members as well as information sessi ons with MEA secretariats.  The third phase 
involved discussion of matters arising from the first and second phases.  
4. The report could usefully note that in followi ng this approach, Members have been conscious 
of the importance Ministers placed on enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment, 
in particular the specific direction in Paragraph 32 of the Doha Declaration that the outcome of this 
work be compatible with the open and non-discrimin atory nature of the multilateral trading system, 
not add to or diminish the rights and obligations  of Members under existing WTO agreements, in 
particular the SPS Agreement, or alter the balan ce of these rights and obligations, and take into 
account the needs of developing and least-developed countries. 
 TN/TE/W/72/Rev.1 
Page 2  
 
  5. Further, the report could note that in the fi rst phase, the Committee generally agreed that a 
specific trade obligation (STO) is one that requires an MEA party to take, or refrain from taking, a 
particular action.  Certain obligations in six MEAs  have been identified as STOs by many Members.  
The MEAs are: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 
(CITES), Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), Basel 
Convention on the Control of Tr ansboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal 
(Basel Convention), Cartegena Protocol on Biosafety Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity (Biosafety Protocol), Rotterdam Conven tion on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for 
Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (PIC), and the Stockholm 
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (P OPs).  Having identified these MEAs, Members 
discussed specific provisions which it was widely ag reed constituted STOs.  This discussion identified 
a broad variety of STOs addressing complex environm ental concerns which were not easily classified 
into simple categories.  Many Members submitted papers on this issue which provided important 
focus to the discussion.
1  
 
6. In discussing the second phase, the report could refe r to the Committee’s focus on the role of 
'national experiences' in promoting mutual supporti veness in the trade and environment fields.  A 
number of Members submitted papers2 outlining their national experiences in negotiating and 
implementing specific trade obligations in MEAs, wh ile others described their internal processes.  
 7. Some Members noted key features in the design of STOs during the negotiation and 
implementation of MEAs that contribute to mutual supportiveness such as: careful tailoring of STOs 
to meet a specific environmental objective, while taking into account Parties’ trade-related rights and 
obligations; clarity of scope and application of STOs;  certain procedures laid out in the MEA that rely 
on objective criteria and scientific input to make decisions; and other built-in procedures in the 
MEA for changes to its scope that are inclusive, tr ansparent and appropriately flexible.  These features 
contribute to an MEA's effectiveness and may si gnificantly reduce the likelihood of disagreement 
among Parties concerning an STO.  8. Concerning internal processes, these national e xperiences shared by Members provided useful 
insights into the most effective ways in which Members can work to promote mutually supportive 
trade and environment policies through well-cons idered implementation of their respective 
international obligations.  The papers, experien ces and subsequent discussions highlighted the 
mechanisms established by various WTO Members for ensuring coordination between different 
government bodies; the processes through which confli cting views were reconciled; the way in which 
stakeholders and the public were  consulted; and the development of MEA implementing legislation. 
 
9. The national experiences discussion revealed that national level coordination between 
different domestic agencies and stakeholders invol ved with international agreements is key to 
achieving compatibility between countries’ internati onal obligations and dom estic implementation. 
Several Members noted that effective domestic impl ementation is not only essential but also the most 
efficient and direct means of fostering mutual compatibility between STOs set out in MEAs and WTO rules - whether in the development of negotiati ng positions or the subse quent implementation of 
agreements.  Coordination procedures between  various governmental bodies in developing 
negotiating positions and in drafti ng MEA implementing legislation we re considered useful in both 
averting and reconciling potential issues at the nationa l level.  In addition, procedures that offer 
                                                     
 
1 TN/TE/W/12 (New Zealand), TN/TE/W/13 (Korea) , TN/TE/W/20 (United States), TN/TE/W/22 
(Canada), TN/TE/W/23 (India), TN/TE/W/25 (Norway) , TN/TE/W/26 (Japan), TN/TE/W/28 (Hong Kong 
China), TN/TE/W/29 (Malaysia), TN /TE/W/31 (European Communities), TN/TE/W/35 (China), TN/TE/W/36 
(Chinese Taipei), TN/TE/W/43 (Colombia).          
2 TN/TE/W/28 (Hong Kong, China), TN/TE/W/40 (US) , TN/TE/W/45 (Australia), TN/TE/W/53 (EC), 
TN/TE/W/58 (Switzerland).  TN/TE/W/72/Rev.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  opportunities for stakeholders and the public to of fer their own views and perspectives were also 
deemed useful to Members in their efforts to enha nce mutual supportiveness.   Through such inclusive 
domestic processes, Members can enhance the mutu al supportiveness of trade and environment, as 
called for in the mandate.  
10. One important observation is that, at no point during the CTESS’ sharing of national 
experiences or its negotiati ons under Paragraph 31(i),
 has any Member identified any evidence to the 
contrary.  Moreover, many delegati ons consider the relationship betw een trade and environment to be 
working well.  
11. In light of the above, Australia proposes a report that can set out the central conclusions of 
Members, such as:  
• The importance to trade and the environment of working to ensure the continuation and 
enhancement of a mutually supportive relationship.  
 
• That the relationship between WTO Agreements  and specific trade obligations in MEAs 
is working well.  The Committee did not hear  evidence to the contrary.  Many Members 
identified some key features of certain STOs a nd domestic procedures that contribute to a 
mutually supportive relationship.  
 
• The importance of coordination at the national level in promoting mutual supportiveness 
between trade and environment policies.  The CTESS appears to have generally agreed it 
is desirable for WTO Members to undertake national level coordination in the negotiation 
and implementation of obligati ons contained in the WTO Agreements and the MEAs to 
which they are parties. 
 
• The value of exchanging national experiences in the negotiation and implementation of 
environmental agreements.  Many Members have agreed that it would be useful for Members to continue to share national e xperiences concerning STOs under negotiation in 
MEAs, and implementation of STOs set out in MEAs.   
 12. Based on these conclusions, the CTESS might wish to RECOMMEND ways in which 
Members can build on these observations and conclu sions and continue to enhance the mutually 
supportive relationship.  For example, Members may wish to continue to share national experiences 
related to negotiating and implementing specific trad e obligations set out in MEAs through the regular 
session of the CTE.  Members may wish to report on  their national coordination processes as well as 
specific issues which have arisen in their domestic coordination processes.     
__________