 
 RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/CTE/M/37 
13 July 2004 
  (04-3012) 
Committee on Trade and Environment  
 
  
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 21 JUNE 2004 
 
Note by the Secretariat
 
 
 
1. The Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE Regular) met on 21 June 2004 under the 
Chairmanship of Ambassador Naéla Gabr (Egypt).  The following agenda proposed in 
WTO/AIR/2328, dated 3 June 2004, was adopted: 
I. PARAGRAPH 32 ................................................................................................................... ....1 
 A. PARAGRAPH  32(I)  (MARKET  ACCESS)...........................................................................1  
      1.  Market Access.............................................................................................................. .....1 
      2.  Sector Analysis ("win-win-win")......................................................................................2  
 B.  PARAGRAPH  32(II)  (TRIPS)...............................................................................................4  
 C.  PARAGRAPH  32(III)  (LABELLING)..................................................................................5  
 D.  OTHER  ITEMS  ON THE  CTE  WORK  PROGRAMME......................................................5  
II. PARAGRAPH 33 ................................................................................................................... ....6 
III. PARAGRAPH 51 ................................................................................................................... ....6 
IV. OTHER BUSINESS ................................................................................................................. ..8 
 
 
I. PARAGRAPH 32 
A. PARAGRAPH  32(I)  (MARKET  ACCESS) 
The effect of environmental measures on market access, especially in relation to developing 
countries, in particular the least-developed among them, and those situations in which the 
elimination or reduction of trade restricti ons and distortions would benefit trade, the 
environment and development.  
1. Market access 
2. The representative of India  recalled that India had made a su bmission circulated in document 
WT/CTE/W/207, dated 21 May 2002, which highlighted certain market access problems faced by 
developing countries due to environmental measures.  Suggestions had been made to take forward the 
objective of sustainable development in a manner consistent with the principle of common but 
differentiated responsibilities.  He sought further discussion on that paper.    
3. The representative of the European Communities (EC ) agreed with some of the principles put 
forward in the Indian submission.  He said that it was the sovereign right of each Member to develop WT/CTE/M/37 
Page 2  
 
 legislation in order to address certain environmenta l concerns.  However, this should be done in such 
a manner that trade obstacles would be avoided, as far as possible, and, in particular, for developing 
country exports.  He highlighted two relevant elements which the EC was currently working on.  First, 
with regard to transparency in the preparation of  new legislation and involvement of stakeholders, 
including those from developing countries, progress had been made through the use of web 
consultations and dialogues with legislators.  Seco ndly, on technical assistance, he recalled that his 
delegation had made a submission in document WT/CTE/W/231, dated 3 September 2003, listing 
approximately 300 technical assistance programme s financed by EC member States and by the 
European Commission.  More activities in this fi eld had been developed internally, and also in 
international fora.  He gave the example of the Consultative Task Force on Environmental Requirements and Market Access developed as  a result of the UNCTAD Workshop in Rio in 
June 2004.  This project had been financed by EC member States, in particular, the United Kingdom 
and the Netherlands.  He recalled that representa tives from the EC had a ttended relevant UNCTAD 
Workshops in Thailand, the Philippines and in Brazil,  and believed that such activities were important 
to build confidence among Members on trade and environment issues.   
4. The representative of the United States (US
) said that the submission by India contained 
interesting ideas on how the CTE might proceed with this agenda item, and merited further 
consideration.  He noted that the EC had raised certain elements as mentioned in the Indian paper 
regarding information sharing, and, in particular , information on regulatory approaches to ensure 
transparency and allowing opportunities for comments from other Members.  The US had provided 
such information in 2002 (WT/CTE/M/31), and he encouraged other Members to build on this.   
5. The representative of China  agreed that the Indian paper merited further discussion.  She 
noted that the CTE discussions had been focused on the trade restrictive effects of environmental 
measures.  She believed that there was also a need to reflect on the positive impacts of certain 
measures, such as technology transfer, financial or technical assistance, which were equally, or, in 
some cases, more important to developing country Memb ers to address issues related to market access 
or the protection of the environment. 
6. The representative of India  welcomed the comments made, an d invited substantive exchange 
on the Indian submission at the next meeting. 
7. The representative of Canada  recalled that the Committee had not had a focussed debate on 
the Indian submission, and reiterated the need for structured discussion in the Committee.    
8. The Chairperson  agreed on the importance of focusse d discussion, and invited Members to 
come back with further inputs on the Indian paper,  to which the Committee would revert at the next 
meeting.  
9. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2. Sector analysis ("win-win-win") 
10. The representative of UNEP  briefed the CTE on the outcome of a recent UNEP Workshop on 
Fisheries Subsidies and Sustainable Fisheries Management held on 26-27 April 2004 
(WT/CTE/W/236, dated 16 June 2004).  She recalled that the summary of that event prepared by the 
Workshop's co-chairs had also been submitted by New Zealand to the Negotiating Group on Rules.  
This fifth workshop hosted by UNEP on the subject had been attended by over 100 participants from 
governments, IGOs, NGOs and regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs).  At the 
Workshop, there had been a view that subsidie s often contributed to fleet overcapacity and 
overfishing.  A positive outcome of the current WTO ne gotiations on fisheries subsidies could be seen 
as part of a range of national and international solutions for the sector, and could contribute to a  WT/CTE/M/37 
 Page 3 
 
 
 mutually supportive relationship between trade a nd environment, including between WTO rules and 
multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs).  Sh e made reference to the following two background 
documents commissioned by UNEP:  first, a “matrix” paper which analyzed the impact of different 
types of fisheries subsidies under various management and bioeconomic conditions, and a second 
paper which had stimulated discussion on possible options for amending the existing WTO 
Agreement on Subsidies and Counter vailing Measures for the protecti on of fishery resources.  It 
related to possible new institutional mechanisms to accompany improved WTO disciplines;  the 
burden of proof in future WTO challenges to fisheries subsidies;  the design of a subsidy as opposed 
to its context or impacts;  and special and di fferential treatment for developing countries.   
11. At the Workshop, there had been a view that s ubsidies which contributed to overcapacity or 
overfishing should not be allowed, whereas subs idies that could have a positive impact on the 
resource would need to be in place.  The issues of distant water fleets, artisanal fisheries, access 
agreements, transparency and information flow had also been discussed.  Furthermore, the need to 
improve information exchange and cooperation betw een relevant international bodies, including the 
WTO, FAO, OECD, UNEP, RFMOs and relevant MEAs in order to find a common basis for criteria, 
had been highlighted.  UNEP had been encouraged to continue its work in areas such as convening 
stakeholders' dialogue, empirical and analytical stud ies, capacity building and technical assistance.  
Further information could be obtained  from the UNEP ETB website.    
12. The representative of Venezuela  recalled that his delegation had participated in the UNEP 
Workshop and was satisfied with the result.  He  found the Workshop programme balanced and had 
taken into account the different aspects of the negotiations as well as the problems of fishery 
subsidies, in particular, those of developing countr ies.  He highlighted paragraphs 8, 9 and 16 of 
document WT/CTE/W/236 and the issue of artisanal fi sheries, and believed that this needed to be 
further discussed with a view to reaching a de finition.  He noted that Paragraph 28 of the 
Doha Declaration provided the ma ndate for negotiations on WTO Rules to clarify and improve 
disciplines on fisheries subsidies, and sought clar ification on how this subject and the UNEP report 
were going to be dealt with in the CTE.    
13. The Chairperson  noted that under Paragraph 32 (i), the CTE was mandated to pursue work on 
the effect of environmental measures on market access, and those situations in which the elimination 
or reduction of trade restrictions and distortio ns would benefit trade, the environment and 
development.  She believed that it went along with receiving information from other organizations to 
facilitate the debate.  Members could comment on the information received, such as that in the UNEP 
paper, if they so wished. 
14. The representative of Egypt  recalled that in the Doha Declaration, the subject of fisheries 
subsidies was taken up both under Paragraph 28 co ncerning WTO Rules and Paragraph 31 concerning 
Trade and Environment negotiations.  He believed under Paragraph 32 (i), the Committee should 
address the issue of fisheries in general. 
15. The representative of New Zealand  said that he had participat ed in the UNEP Workshop, and 
believed that the summary report captured the e ssence of the discussions.  His delegation had 
submitted it to the Rules Negotiating Group (document TN/RL/W/161) where the actual negotiations 
on fisheries subsidies were taking place.  He note d the numerous activities in this area that had taken 
place recently, and informed the Committee of  a WWF publication entitled "Healthy Fisheries, 
Sustainable Trade" presented at the WTO on 9 June 2004, during the week of Rules Negotiations.   
16. The representative of Japan  highlighted the importance of fisheries to Japan, as it was one of 
the biggest consumers of fish products.  His dele gation had been actively participating in the 
discussion on fisheries subsidies in the Rules nego tiations.  He welcomed the UNEP report, and stated 
that he might come back to it in the future. WT/CTE/M/37 
Page 4  
 
 17. The representative of the United States
 understood that the UNEP Workshop had been an 
important event, and that the report was a summary of the Chairs of the Workshop and not a 
consensus document.   
18. The representative of UNEP  confirmed that the report had been prepared by the co-chairs of 
the Workshop under their own responsibility.  Participants and other stakeholders had emphasized the 
need to feed the results of the Workshop into the WTO discussions.  Consequently, the report had 
been submitted for the information of the CTE.   
19. The Committee took note  of the statements made. 
B. PARAGRAPH 32(II) (TRIPS ) 
The relevant provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property 
Rights (TRIPS)    
20. The Chairperson
 recalled that at the previous meeting, a request had been made by the EC for 
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to update the Committee on the outcome of the CBD 
meeting in Kuala Lumpur (WT/CTE/M/36).  Consequently, a note had been received from the 
Executive Secretary of the CBD reporting the decisions made at that meeting (WT/CTE/W/235, 
dated 8 June 2004). 
21. The representative of Canada  sought clarification on the impact of the CBD decisions on 
intellectual property rights, and thei r relevance to this agenda item. 
22. The representative of Egypt  believed that Decision VII/29 on "Transfer of technology and 
technology cooperation" (paragraph 21 of WT/CTE/W /235) had direct relevance to the work of the 
CTE.  Under that Decision, the Secretariats of the CBD, WIPO, UNCTAD, and other relevant 
organizations had been identified as the main actors to undertake the task of further exploring and 
analyzing the role of intellectual property rights an d technology transfer.  With respect to this, he 
noted that the WTO had a role.  Various other decisi ons were relevant to the WTO, not only in the 
CTE under this specific agenda item, but also in the areas of agriculture and services.  It was useful 
for Members to be aware of any development in the work of the CBD which could influence WTO 
work, and vice versa.  Furthermore, he noted the numerous decisions which were of importance to 
developing countries.  He gave the example of De cision VII/19 on "Access and benefit-sharing as 
related to genetic resources" (page 2 of WT/CTE/W/235).  He highlighted the fact that the Conference 
of the Parties (COP) had specifically invited the WT O - among other international organizations - to 
cooperate with the Working Group on Access and Benefit-sharing in elaborating an international 
regime.  One of the elements to be considered by  the Working Group was the issue of disclosure of 
origin/source/legal provenance of genetic resources.  He was of the view that the TRIPs Council or 
the CTE should be informed of the evolution of the work in that Group.   
23. With respect to the COP of the Cartagena Protoc ol on Biosafety, he highlighted the adoption 
of Decision BS-I/7 on the "Establishment of pr ocedures and mechanisms on compliance under the 
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety," and noted that it  had taken more time for some other MEAs to 
reach such decisions.  He believed that the mechan isms under the Cartagena Protocol could provide 
possibilities for the settlement of any disputes which might arise between the Parties of the Protocol 
before having recourse to the dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO. 
24. The representative of the European Communities  drew the CTE's attention to paragraph 11 of 
document WT/CTE/W/235, which made direct refe rence to intellectual property rights.  He 
highlighted the CBD/COP Decision to mandate th e Working Group on Access and Benefit-sharing to 
elaborate an international regime on access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing.  One of the  WT/CTE/M/37 
 Page 5 
 
 
 elements to be considered by the Group related dir ectly to the work of the WTO, including intellectual 
property rights.  He recalled that in the EC submission on the relationship between the TRIPS 
Agreement and the CBD (WT/CTE/W/223), and, more specifically, on the issue of disclosure of 
origin of genetic resources in pa tent applications, his delegation had expressed willingness to commit 
itself to the discussions in the TRIPS Council on th e introduction of a multilateral system to ensure 
transparency. 
25. The representative of Venezuela  expressed his wish to invite the CBD to participate in further 
discussions of the CBD paper, and, in partic ular, the part on technology transfer.    
26. The representatives of Brazil , Ecuador  and India  endorsed the view on the relevance of the 
CBD report to the CTE's work, and on the usefulne ss of inviting the CBD Secretariat to further 
explain the CBD paper.  
27. The representative of the United States  drew the Committee's attention to Annex 3 of the 
Rules of Procedures of the General Council concerni ng observer organizations and their submissions, 
and invited the CTE to adopt a systematic approach in this regard.  He did not see the need for a 
collective invitation, since as an observer, the CBD had the opportunity to choose to attend CTE meetings in accordance with the rules of procedure. 
28. The representative of the European Communities
 supported the statements made by 
Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador, India and Egypt, and agreed that the CBD had the possibility of attending 
the CTE meetings.  However, due to the interest shown by a number of Members, it would be 
appropriate to draw the attention of the CBD to the wish expressed for its presence at the next 
meeting, so as to facilitate further discussion on the CBD paper. 
29. The representative of Canada  said that given the location of its Secretariat, the CBD should be 
informed of the interest expressed, so that its repr esentatives could be prepared to participate in the 
next CTE meeting. 
30. The representative of Venezuela   agreed that since several dele gations had shown interest in 
the CBD paper, in particular, in those elements related to the negotiations , the presence of the 
Secretariat of the CBD would be useful.  He highlighted the importance of further coordination and 
transparency between relevant organizations. 
31. The Chairperson  concluded that the CBD Secretariat would be informed of the fact that 
interest had been expressed by a number of Memb ers in the CBD submission and in its participation 
at the next Committee meeting to facilitate future discussions.  
32. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
C. PARAGRAPH 32(III) (LABELLING ) 
Labelling for Environmental Purposes 
33. No statements were made under this sub-item. 
D. OTHER ITEMS ON THE CTE  WORK PROGRAMME  
34. No statements were made under this sub-item. WT/CTE/M/37 
Page 6  
 
 II. PARAGRAPH 33 
We recognize the importance of technical assistance and capacity building in the 
field of trade and environment to developing countries, in particular the 
least-developed among them.  We also enco urage that expertise and experience be 
shared with Members wishing to perform envi ronmental reviews at the national level.   
35. The representative of the European Communities
 informed the Committee of a decision by 
the European Commission and the International Trade Centre (ITC) to establish and co-finance a 
Trust Fund for Trade-Related Technical Assistance de dicated to Asian countries.  This Fund, to be 
managed by the ITC, would operat e over a period of three years as a tool to deliver technical 
assistance activities rapidly and to provide access to  the external expertise required to better handle 
the complexities of the multilateral trading system.  The aims included rais ing the awareness of WTO 
rules and issues among officials, improving the capacity of the business and export potential of 
developing countries, as well as strengthening th e capacity of regional agencies dealing with 
economic and trade issues.  It was a demand-driven programme, and least-developed countries would 
receive particular attention.  Requests could be sent by the government of the beneficiary country to the ITC and to the EC delegation in the capital.  Further information would be available soon on the 
ITC's web site. 
36. The Chairperson
 encouraged other Members to provide further information on technical 
assistance and capacity building at the next meeting.   
37. The Committee took note  of the statements made. 
 
III. PARAGRAPH 51 
The Committee on Trade and Development and the Committee on Trade and 
Environment shall, within their respective mandates, each act as a forum to identify 
and debate developmental and environmental aspects of the negotiations, in order to  
help achieve the objective of having sustai nable development appropriately reflected. 
38. The Chairperson  recalled that she had conducted info rmal consultations on the way forward 
on Paragraph 51, and discussions had been held on an  EC proposal to invite briefings from relevant 
international organizations involved in sustainable development issues.  It had been agreed that the 
EC would consult with interested Members to clarify the proposal before she sought further guidance 
from the Committee on the next step.  She noted that in February and April 2003, the Committee had 
heard reports by the Secretariat on negotiations in the areas of Agriculture, Rules, Services and 
Market Access for non-agricultural products (NAMA) focussing on the environmental aspects of 
these negotiations.  She believed that updates of such  reports would be useful at a later stage in the 
light of developments in the negotiations, and when  delegations considered them appropriate.  She 
would meet with the Chairperson of the Committee on Trade and Development to discuss the mandate under Paragraph 51 as well as how it had been ta ken up in the two respective Committees, and would 
report orally to the CTE on this exchange at the next meeting. 
39. The representative of the European Communities
 confirmed that his delegation would hold 
informal consultations with interested Members to  clarify its proposal as well as to discuss the 
technical details.  The Chairperson would be informed of the results. 
40. The representative of New Zealand  recalled that the mandat e under Paragraph 51 was to 
identify and debate developmental and environmental aspects of the negotiations in order to help 
achieve the objective of having sustainable development appropriately reflected.  In this context, he highlighted the fisheries subsidies negotiations taking place in the Rules Negotiating Group.  In his  WT/CTE/M/37 
 Page 7 
 
 
 view, while these negotiations were taking place in  the Rules Negotiating Group, with the objectives 
wider than the conservation of fish stocks, they were cross-referenced in Paragraph 31.  They had the 
potential to provide important environmental benefits from the Doha Round, and provided an 
opportunity to give credibility to the WTO's sustai nable development agenda.  He noted that during 
the negotiations, developing country Members had al so found the potential developmental benefits 
from addressing trade and market distortions caused by subsidies in this sector.  He believed that it 
was an area where the elimination or reduction of trade distortions could benefit trade, the 
environment and development, and it was appropriate  for the CTE to be informed of the progress 
made in the fisheries subsidies negotiations in line with its mandate under Paragraph 51.   
41. He recalled that until recently, fifteen papers  addressing fisheries subsidies had been 
submitted to the Rules Negotiating Group, represen ting the views of over twenty Members, and 
including one on behalf of a group of small vulnerable coastal states.  He found that good progress 
had been made in the negotiations built on the momentum created the year before.  Certain 
commonalities were emerging from a number of propos als, such as the need for a "red box" of 
prohibited subsidies, certain exceptions and transitio nal arrangements, as well as special consideration 
of the needs of developing country Members.  While it was not his intention to go into detail at this stage, nor did he think it desirable or appropriate to enter into a debate on substantive issues in this 
Committee;  he wished to identify fisheries subsidie s as one area of the negotiations where there were 
environmental and developmental aspects under the Paragraph 51 mandate.   
42. The representative of the United States
 welcomed the opportunity for future updates of the 
reports on negotiations in Agriculture, Rules, Serv ices and NAMA.  He recalled that the US had, in 
the past, noted the potential environmental benefits from the progress in the negotiations on subsidies 
in agriculture, NAMA, environmental goods and serv ices.  Like New Zealand, he also identified the 
negotiations on fisheries subsidies, and believed  these provided the WTO with an opportunity to 
demonstrate in a concrete way that trade liberaliz ation could benefit the environment and sustainable 
development.  He noted that the objective of the negotiations had broad support from WTO Members, including a number of developing country Members,  and had also received support from the various 
environmental NGOs, such as the World Wildlife Fu nd (WWF).  He made reference to the WWF's 
publication "Healthy Fisheries, Sustainable Trade"  in which he found stimulating ideas.  He 
welcomed the progress made in the fisheries subsidies negotiations and the emergence of 
commonality in certain areas, and hoped that this momentum would be built on in the months ahead. 
43. The representative of Japan
 recalled that his delegation had been actively participating in the 
discussions on fisheries subsidies in the Rules Negotiating Group, and agreed that Members should not enter into the substance of these negotiations in  the CTE.  He stated that Japan's interest was 
resource conservation and sustainable developmen t, and could not agree with New Zealand's 
approach, which would prohibit almost all fisheries subsidies without any prior assessments or certain 
exceptions.  His view was that subsidies which actually contributed to over-capacity, illegal, 
unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing should be  prohibited.  However, certain subsidies which 
contributed to sustainable development in the fishery sector should be permitted.  They should not be 
exceptions, but part of the rules.  He made re ference to document TN/RL/W/159, submitted to the 
Negotiating Group on Rules, containing Japan's pos ition.  Regarding the cons ideration of fisheries 
subsidies under Paragraph 51, he noted that there existed other areas in the Doha Round negotiations 
in which developmental and environmental aspects coul d be identified, and gave the example of tariff 
elimination or trade facilitation measures for fisher y products and other living natural resources.  
44. The representative of the Philippines
 associated his delegation with the statement made by 
New Zealand.  He believed the problems confronting the fisheries sector required a holistic solution 
as alluded to in the UNEP paper (WT/CTE/W/236).  He noted that the negotiations on fisheries 
subsidies had gained momentum as witnessed by the submissions and discussions in the Negotiating 
Group on Rules.  They touched upon substantial technical issues, including proposed general rules WT/CTE/M/37 
Page 8  
 
 and presumptions, possible exceptions, as well as speci al and differential treatment.  He believed that 
given the Group's mandate to strengthen the existing rules on subsidies in the fisheries sector, 
Members should consider how they could further cont ribute in that direction, mindful that a positive 
outcome had the potential to resolv e certain concerns expressed in  the CTE on fisheries.  He 
encouraged developing country Members to engage actively in the work of the Negotiating Group on 
Rules, reflecting New Zealand's point on the pote ntial developmental and environmental benefits 
from a positive outcome.  He agreed that the ne gotiations provided an opportunity for Members to 
give credibility to the WTO's sustainable development agenda. 
45. The representative of Korea
 said that, as a Member with a su bstantial interest in the fisheries 
trade, Korea welcomed the progress made in the Ru les Negotiating Group, and hoped that it would be 
able to arrive at a viable solution to address issues  relating to fisheries subsidies.  He shared Japan's 
view that different views still existed on the best approach for seeking solutio ns.  He believed that 
fisheries subsidies involved numerous complex issues, and that one sh ould avoid a broad brush 
approach, but should engage in a comprehensive analysis on the different types of fisheries subsidies 
before arriving at any recommendations.  He agre ed that the CTE was not the forum for substantive 
discussions on fisheries subsidies.  
46. The representative of Venezuela  found the idea of discussing the issue of fisheries subsidies 
under this agenda item interesting.  He made reference to paragraph 8 of the UNEP paper, and agreed 
that the problem of fisheries subsidies was of par ticular importance to developing countries where the 
fisheries sector was a vital source of food security, employment and foreign exchange.   
47. The representative of Chinese Taipei  agreed with Japan that those subsidies which 
contributed to overcapacity and IUU fisheries shou ld be prohibited, and those which contributed to 
the sustainable development of th is sector should be permitted. 
48. The representative of the European Communities  recalled that the EC's position on fisheries 
subsidies was to tackle the issue of over-fishing by banning subsidies which physically increased 
fishing capacity.  This should be combined with a "green box" permitting subsidies which contributed, for instance, to the protection of the envi ronment.  Other elements were also important, in 
particular, transparency and state controls within Members.  He agreed with the view that a blanket 
ban on subsidies could create difficulties for local a nd regional fisheries, and, in particular, in 
developing countries.   
49. The Committee took note
 of the statements made. 
IV. OTHER BUSINESS 
50. The Chairperson  informed delegations that the next meeting would be held 
on 14 October 2004. 
__________ 