WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TE/W/62 
14 October 2005 
 (05-4692) 
Committee on Trade and Environment 
Special Session Original:   Spanish 
 
 
 
INTEGRATED PROPOSAL ON ENVIRONMENTAL 
GOODS FOR DEVELOPMENT 
 
Submission by Argentina  
 
Paragraph 31(iii)  
   
 The following communication, dated 11 October 2005, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegation of Argentina
. 
 
_______________ 
  I. INTRODUCTION 
1. This document is a contribution to the discussions of the Committee on Trade and 
Environment in Special Session (CTESS) designed to  ensure that the approach adopted in the 
framework of the negotiations under paragraph 31(iii)  of the Doha Ministerial Declaration results 
simultaneously in fair environmental, trade, and development benefits for all WTO Members. 
2. We are convinced that the negotiations must properly reflect the development objectives set 
forth in the Marrakech Agreement and reaffirm ed in the Doha Ministerial Declaration. 
II. APPROACHES PROPOSED TO DATE 
3. There is no internationally agreed definition of  environmental goods, nor are there any agreed 
criteria for their classification.  As a result, WTO Members have gone about identifying the goods 
covered by the paragraph 31(iii) manda te in different ways.  In trying to produce a definition of such 
goods, a number of criteria have been discussed. 
4. Adopting an approach that relies on the preparation of lists a number of Members, taking as a 
reference the lists produced by APEC, OECD
1 and UNCTAD2 as well as certain reference points, and 
submitted their own national lists of what they  would consider to be environmental goods.3 
                                                      
1 Document TN/TE/W/18. 
2 Room document TD/B/COM.1/EM.21/CRP.1, Meeting of Experts in Geneva, July 2003, and updated 
2005 version with statistical data.  The "UNCTAD list"  has products in common with APEC and the OECD, but 
also includes other products with export potential for the developing countries. 
3 Documents TN/TE/W/50/W/Suppl.1 of 1 July 2005 from Canada;  TN/TE/W/47/Suppl.1 of 
27 June 2005 from the European Union;  TN/TE/W/50 of 2 June 2005 from Canada;  TN/TE/W/49 of 26 May 2005 from New Zealand;  TN/TE/W/48 of 18 February 2005 from the Republic of Korea;  TN/TE/W/57 
of 6 July 2005 from Switzerland;  TN/TE/W/56 of 5 July 2005 from the EU;  TN/TE/W/62 
Page 2  
 
 5. In the last CTESS meetings
4, certain delegations pointed out the problems involved in the "list 
approach"5 owing to the fact that the resulting reduction or elimination of tariff barriers to the goods 
concerned would benefit the de veloped countries above all.  Thus, the proposals submitted by 
countries such as Brazil, China, India, and Cuba have given the negotiations a new momentum by 
addressing the demands and concerns of the devel oping countries through approaches other than, or 
complementary to, the "list approach".  These pr oposals seek to:  (i) introduce the sustainable 
development dimension into the environmental goods  negotiations;  (ii) respect the principal of 
special and differential treatment;  (iii) ensure the tran sfer of "clean technologies";   (iv) favour market 
access for products of interest to the developing countries. 
III. THE PROPOSED APPROACHES 
6. Although defended by certain Members for its a pparent transparency and predictability, the 
"list approach" does not fulfil the development obj ectives set forth in the Marrakesh Agreement and 
the reaffirmed in the Doha Ministerial Declaration.   The reduction and elimination of tariff barriers, 
which should be a means of promo ting development, becomes an end in itself.  Nor does the list 
approach resolve the problem of multiple use. 
7. While the "environmental project approach"6 presented by India, enables the development and 
environmental objectives set forth in the Doha Minister ial Mandate to be taken into consideration, and 
complies with the preamble to the Marrakesh Ag reement, its implementation does not depend on the 
multilateral trading system.  It could currently be applied unilaterally or on the basis of bilateral 
agreements. 
8. The submission by Brazil7 takes account of the concerns and interests of the developing 
countries.  Moreover, it stresses the commitment unde rtaken by WTO Members to "seek to achieve 
environmental objectives while pursuing trade libera lization and addressing development concerns."  
To that end, it stresses the need  for the CTESS to focus on development in the context of paragraph 
31(iii) of the Doha Ministerial Declaration.  Ne vertheless, Argentina does not consider the UNCTAD 
definition of environmentally preferable products8 to be the best way of defining an environmental 
good, since it leaves open the possibility of includ ing goods on the basis of their processes and 
production methods (PPMS). 
IV. TOWARDS AN INTEGRATED APPROACH THAT GUARANTEES BENEFITS FOR 
TRADE, THE ENVIRONMEN T, AND DEVELOPMENT 
9. Based on an assessment of the above approaches,  we consider the best option to be an 
integrated approach  which brings together elements from  each one of the proposed solutions: 
- The CTESS should identify "the categories" of environmental projects, such as:  air 
pollution control;  water and waste water ma nagement;  soil and soil conservation;  
solid waste management;  remediation and cl ean up;  noise and vibration abatement;  
                                                                                                                                                                     
TN/TE/W/52-TN/MA/W/18/Add.7 of 4 July 2005 from the United States;  TN/TE/W/44 of 7 October 2004 
from the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, among others. 
4 CTESS held in Geneva:  24 and 25 February and 7 and 8 July 2005. 
5 Submissions by Brazil, TN/TE/W/59 of 8 July 2005;  India, TN/TE/W/51 of 3 July 2005 and 
TN/TE/W/54 of 4 July 2005;  and Cuba, TN/TE/W/55 of 5 July 2005.  Oral statements by Argentina, Brazil, 
Colombia, Bolivia, Venezuela, Paraguay, and Ecuador. 
6 Submissions by India, TN/TE/W/51 of 3 June 2005 and TN/TE/W/54 of 4 July 2005. 
7 Submission by Brazil, TN/TE/W/59 of 8 July 2005. 
8 UNCTAD defined environmentally preferable products as products that cause significantly less 
"environmental harm" at some stage of their "life cycle"  than alternative products th at serve the same purpose 
(TN/TE/INF/7).  TN/TE/W/62 
 Page 3 
 
 
 environmental monitoring and analysis;  process optimization;  energy saving 
management;  renewable energy;  and environment-friendly products. 
- The CTESS should include in each "category" the environmental goods that would be 
"available" for application to the development of national projects. 
- Tariff reduction/elimination and the elimin ation of non-tariff barriers should be 
agreed multilaterally, taking account of speci al and differential treatment, and should 
take effect as of the time that the im porting Member assigns to a given national 
environmental project the goods required to meet the objectives of that project. 
- The tariff benefit granted by the importing Member should cover a specific period, 
i.e. the project implementation phase. 
- The conditions of access to the transfer of "clean technology" and local capacity 
building should be negotiated within the environmental project. 
10. Thus, two cumulative conditions will have to be met in order to be able to benefit from the 
reduction/elimination of tariff and non-tariff restrict ions under paragraph 31(iii)  of the Doha Mandate: 
(a) The goods must be included in one of the environmental project "categories"; 
(b) the goods must be identified within  a national environmental project. 
V. HOW DOES THE NEW PROPOSED APPROACH INTEGRATE EACH OF THE 
PREVIOUS APPROACHES? 
11. The new approach would provide for the mu ltilateral identification of categories of 
environmental projects and "environmental goods" that  could be included in those projects.  The 
Committee will work to ensure that  the identified goods are "eligible " for environmental protection. 
12. The new approach fully respects the soverei gn right of Members to define their own 
environmental policies through their competent na tional bodies, according to their own needs and 
possibilities and the resources available.  It also promotes the development of projects through the elimination of import duties on the goods concerned, while enabling the countries to build up their own technological capacities. 
VI. CONCLUSION 
13. In the light of the above considerations, the new "integrated approach" proposal could be an 
effective and practical means of ensuring an  equitable outcome to the negotiations under 
paragraph 31(iii) in compliance with the Doha Minist erial Mandate, and of contributing to sustainable 
development, both in the developed countries, and in the developing and least developed countries. 
 
__________