 
 RESTRICTED  
WORLD TRADE  WT/CTE/M/11  
  22 August 1996  
ORGANIZATION  
 (96-3320 )  
 
Committee on Trade and Environment  Original:  English  
 
 
 REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 24 -25 JULY 1996  
 
 Note by the Secretariat  
 
 
1. The Committee on Trade and Environment met on 24 and 25 July 1996 under the chairmanship 
of Ambassador Juan Carlos Sánchez Arnau of Argentina.  The agenda contained in WT O/AIR/380 was 
adopted.  
 
Item 2  The rel ationship between environmental policies relevant to trade and environmental measures 
with significant trade effects and the provisions of the  multilateral trading system  
 
2. The representative of the United States  introduced his de legation's paper (WT/CTE/W/37) on 
the use of environmental reviews as a policy tool of governments, providing background on how 
environmental reviews had been used and the type of analysis they provided to policy makers, for example 
in the context of trade  agreements.  Environmental reviews could help to identify complementarities 
between environmental and trade policies and identify actions to enhance positive and avoid negative 
environmental implications in support of sustainable development.  In view of recommendations by 
international bodies, such as the CSD,  encouraging governments to undertake environmental reviews of 
trade agreements, the US proposed that WTO Ministers could recommend to governments to carry out 
environmental reviews of trade agreeme nts likely to have significant environmental effects as part of the 
process of developing these agreements.  Also, Ministers might recommend that WTO Members be 
invited to provide copies of such reviews and their methodologies to the Secretariat for refere nce by 
Members.   
 
3. The representative of India  said his delegation had contributed a non -paper on this Item (dated 
23 July 1996) to initiate discussion of general principles which should be applied to evaluate the 
appropriateness  of environmental policies and measures having trade effects from the point of view of 
WTO principles.  The relevant trade principles were non -discrimination (MFN, national treatment), 
protection through tariffs, transparency, Article XX (necessity and eff ectiveness, least trade restrictiveness, 
proportionality and equivalence, and special and differential treatment of developing countries).  The 
relevant environmental principles were common but differentiated responsibilities, sovereignty over 
environmenta l resources, fair and equitable sharing of benefits, and the special needs of developing 
countries.  India's view was these principles, some of which were elaborated in the non -exhaustive list in 
the non -paper, should be contained in the Report of the CTE to Ministers ("the Report") to guide future 
CTE work.  India had focused on principles related to developing country concerns, which already had 
been accepted in both multilateral trade and environment fora.  By discussing these principles, the CTE 
would b e better placed to analyze how to use existing WTO provisions flexibly to meet the objectives of 
sustainable development, keeping in mind the interests of developing countries.  
 
4. The representative of Singapore, on behalf of ASEAN , agreed with India that the Report should 
contain general principles to evaluate the appropriateness of environmental policies given their potential 
trade effects.  The essence of Agenda 21 was the concept of common but differentiated responsibilities 
and that countries had a sovereign right to design and implement their environmental policies and 
measures as appropriate to protect their domestic environment.  WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 2 
 
5. The representative of New Zealand  said his delegation was familiar with  the merits of 
environmental reviews.  However, he asked the US to clarify the proposed Ministerial recommendation 
for governments to carry out such reviews and why the WTO should endorse environmental reviews 
when international bodies with environmental c ompetence had already done so.  Given the WTO's 
limited competence in the area of the environment, New Zealand questioned whether the WTO should 
recommend the use of a tool which was oriented around environmental considerations.    
 
6. The representative of Korea  supported New Zealand's comments on the US proposal.  
 
7. The representative of Canada  welcomed the US proposal as a way to help countries ensure trade 
and environment policies were mutually supportive .  Canada had completed assessments on the 
environmental effects of the NAFTA and the WTO.   
 
8. The representative of Nigeria  supported India's proposal in principle.  He agreed with New 
Zealand and Korea that the question raised b y the US proposal was whether the WTO was the 
appropriate forum to conduct environmental reviews of trade agreements.  
 
9. The representative of the European Communities  said India's list of general environmental 
principles should include other Rio principles, such as cooperation, and the polluter pays and 
precautionary principles.  
 
10. The representative of Egypt  agreed that India's general princip les should be taken into account 
in the Report and future CTE work.  She supported New Zealand's comments.  
 
11. The representative of Mexico  said his delegation felt environmental reviews were useful and had 
conducted them.  However,  as he did not see the competence of the WTO on environmental matters, 
Mexico could not support the suggestion to submit environmental reviews to the WTO.  These reviews 
should be submitted to organisations with environmental competence.  For the same reas on, he doubted 
the appropriateness of discussing India's environmental principles, but felt the trade principles should be 
reflected in the Report and be kept in mind when discussing other Items.  
 
12. The representative of Peru  asked the US to clarify whether its proposal was within the CTE's 
mandate.  Peru supported India's proposal to include some general principles in the Report, which also 
could incorporate other trade -related principles.  
 
13. The represent ative of Bangladesh  supported India's proposal, keeping in mind the special 
situation of LLDC's.   
 
14. The representative of Pakistan  broadly supported the principles in India's non -paper, and said 
he would comment further on the US  and India's proposals.  
 
15. The representative of Japan  said he would comment on the proposals at a later stage.  
 
16. The representative of Hong Kong  said India's proposal to develop general principles could b e 
complemented by his delegation's proposal on Item 1 (non -paper dated 23 July 1996) for a guide to WTO 
principles for reference by MEA negotiators.   
 
17. The representative of the United States  responded to comments on his delegati on's paper.  As 
to how the proposal fit with the WTO mandate and competence, the US was not suggesting the WTO 
prescribe how environmental reviews should be conducted, but that Ministers could point to reviews as a 
useful tool.  Environmental reviews were relevant to CTE work.  Reviews could contribute to discussion 
in view of the CTE's terms of reference, which mandated it to identify the relationship between trade and 
environmental measures to promote sustainable development, and the issues raised by Item  2.  They 
were also of benefit for work on Item 6 to find ways to maximize the positive relationship between trade 
and environment.  The premise of the US paper related to the importance of national coordination.  To          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 3 
 
the extent that environmental reviews p rovided information on the relationship between trade and 
environment, the US was suggesting these reviews be made available to interested Members.  He recalled 
that the US had provided its reviews to the Secretariat for analytical work it had conducted fo r the CTE.   
 
18. The US felt India's non -paper was too broad in that it suggested the CTE's role should be to 
evaluate the appropriateness of environmental policies and measures having trade effects.  He said that 
in the establishment of GATT/WTO work on trade and environment, India's view had been that this was 
inappropriate.  Although the idea to identify relevant trade principles was interesting, he asked where it 
would lead.  If the idea were similar to Hong Kong's pro posal, he said that attempts to reduce a complex 
set of rules might create confusion.  Some of the trade principles, such as effectiveness, were not found 
in Article XX jurisprudence.  There was a reference to effectiveness in the Appellate Body Report on 
Reformulated Gasoline, which had found this term was not a sensible proposition as the effectiveness of 
a measure could not be assessed in advance.  Some of the principles were related to their specific context 
and generalizing them was problematic.  Given  the WTO was a rules -based system, general principles 
did not help Members abide by the rules.  The environmental principles were useful to the extent that 
the list would be comprehensive and addressed the flexibility of WTO rules to take them into account . 
 
Item 3  The relationship between the provisions of the multilateral trading system and (a) charges and 
taxes for environmental purposes  and (b) requirements for environmental purposes relating to 
products, including standards and technical regulations, p ackaging, labelling and recycling  
 
19. The representative of India  said his delegation had submitted a non -paper (dated 23  July 1996) 
to draw attention to the fact that this Item as a whole covered issues that had a direct trade impact, 
especially for developing countries.  India proposed the discussion of this Item be b roadened to examine 
all of its aspects in an objective and integrated way.  India's non -paper sought to convey that discussion 
of eco -labelling had not clarified some of India's concerns.  The primary purpose of examining 
environmental measures such as eco -labelling should be whether they promoted or obstructed the WTO 
commitment to an open, equitable and non -discriminatory trading system.  Discussion should include 
developing country concerns about the impact of environmental measures on market access.  It  would 
be premature to reach any conclusion on this Item without taking into account the concerns expressed in 
India's non -paper.  
 
20. The representative of Singapore, on behalf of ASEAN , shared the concerns expressed in India's 
non-paper.  The Report should not contain any conclusions on Item 3.  As no internationally -agreed 
methodology of life cycle approaches (LCA) existed, clarification of this issue was necessary.  
 
Item 3(a ) The relationship between the provisions of the multilat eral trading system and charges 
and taxes for environmental purposes  
 
21. The representative of Australia  said, although there had been no proposals on this Item, it was 
important and should be included in future work.  
 
 
Item 3(b)  The relationship between the provisions of the multilateral trading system and  
  requirements for environmental purposes relating to products, including standards 
  and technical regulations, packaging, labelling  and recycling  
 
  Packaging and recycling  
 
22. The representative of Mexico  said this Item should be included in future CTE work.  
 
23. The representative of Canada  said this Item needed to be further addressed as work to date had 
focused on eco -labelling .  However, the approach taken on eco -labelling might provide some indication 
as to how other issues could be addressed after Singapore.  
 WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 4 
 
 
  Eco-labelling  
 
24. The representative of Canada  introduced his delegation's draft Decision on eco -labelling (dated 
23 July 1996), which was based on Canada's paper (WT/CTE/W/21 -G/TBT/W/21), subsequent 
consultations (plurilateral, bilateral and with Canada's business community), and Canada's statement a t 
the June 1995 meeting.  Paragraphs 1 to 3 were points (a) to (c) of Canada's initial paper, which a large 
number of delegations supported.  Paragraph 4 was Canada's suggested approach to point (d) given that 
the development of LCA was of direct relevance  to discussion in the CTE and the Committee on 
Technical Barriers to Trade (CTBT).  Paragraph 5 was a "without prejudice" paragraph that recognized 
the diversity of views on non -product -related PPMs.  Canada felt the draft Decision represented a realistic 
and balanced result in Singapore and asked delegations to review it in the context of an overall review of 
the Report and the state of play of discussion on other Items.  He said the EC non -paper (dated 23 July 
1996) differed in its objectives for Singapor e (i.e. Canada was aiming for "transparency with teeth"), but 
converged with respect to the need for increased transparency of eco -labelling programmes based on the 
TBT Agreement.  The draft Decision recognized further analysis was necessary for aspects of  
eco-labelling, but not for basic TBT transparency requirements.  It was in the interest of exporters both 
in developed and developing countries to enhance transparency.  Canada did not foresee any difficulty 
in integrating this draft Decision into an omni bus decision at the Ministerial Conference.  
 
25. The representative of the European Communities  introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 
23 July 1996) on voluntary eco -labelling schemes based on LCA, the first of the categories i dentified by 
ISO (multiple criteria -based, third party labelling programmes).  The use of voluntary eco -labelling 
schemes was consistent with Chapter 4 of Agenda 21 and was less trade -restrictive than other 
environmental policy instruments which resulted i n product -related trade barriers.  Voluntary eco -
labelling schemes based on LCA did not seem to be fully covered by the TBT Agreement and non -
product -related PPM criteria did not fall within the definition of a standard in Annex 1.  Partial coverage 
by the  TBT Agreement excluding non -product -related criteria did not make sense for the operation of 
eco-labelling schemes.  There were two alternative options to ensure an appropriate level of 
transparency:  (i) to seek full coverage under the TBT Agreement;  or  (ii) to negotiate an ad hoc  
instrument, for example a code of conduct.  The EC felt it was not possible to shape an agreement dealing 
only with those elements for which a certain measure of consensus had emerged.  It was inappropriate 
to address the trans parency issue without first clarifying the status of LCA in voluntary eco -labelling.  The 
EC expected progress on eco -labelling was possible to achieve balanced, comprehensive results in 
Singapore, taking into account, as agreed in other fora, that the use  of eco -labelling based on LCA should 
be encouraged as a means to assist consumers in making informed choices and to promote sustainable 
patterns of production and consumption.  The EC hoped Canada's draft together with the other 
proposals would contribute  to a results -oriented discussion on eco -labelling.  Canada's draft contained 
some valuable elements, particularly the recognition that voluntary eco -labelling schemes were 
predominantly based on LCA and were effective market -based instruments to promote e nvironmentally -
preferable products and services.  The fourth preambular paragraph was consistent with the EC's 
position.  However, the EC could not agree to provide formal recognition in Singapore that eco -labelling 
programmes were covered by the TBT Agree ment as the question of whether their use of LCA was 
WTO compatible would be left undecided.  As the EC was not convinced these issues could be 
disassociated, the status of LCA under WTO Agreements should be clarified first.  The EC had doubts 
on the logic al consistency of the draft, particularly recognizing that all eco -labelling programmes were 
within the TBT Agreement's scope and indicating that the Decision would not prejudge views on non -
product -related PPMs.  The draft Decision prejudged the latter is sue. 
 
26. The representative of Nigeria  did not agree that the development of international standards based 
on LCA could be presumed to be covered by the TBT Agreement as indicated in Canada's draft Decision.  
He asked if Canada woul d consider deleting the second sentence of paragraph 4.   
 
27. The representative of Pakistan  said eco -labelling based on LCA including non -product -related 
PPMs tended to restrict market access for developing countries and undermine their comparative          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 5 
 
advantage.  Before arriving at any recommendations, analytical work was necessary on the impact of eco -
labelling on developing countries' trade opportunities.  
 
28. The representative of the Sierra Leone  expressed co ncern at the attempt to include non -product -
related PPMs in the TBT Agreement.  Although LCA was a valuable tool for assessing environmental 
impact and should be developed to improve environmental protection, its current application was limited 
to one aspe ct of the cradle -to-grave cycle (usually the final production stage) instead of throughout a 
product's the life cycle.  A comprehensive LCA was time -consuming and expensive.  To include non -
product -related PPMs in the TBT Agreement would disadvantage devel oping country imports and might 
not even benefit the environment in the exporting country.  Deciding which factors should be considered 
was subjective and the importing country might not consider the other countries' ecological capacities and 
environmental  priorities.  The OECD had judged that "to allow countries to discriminate against imports 
based on their method of production and the resulting environmental externalities would be an 
unmanageable feature for the trading system.  In many cases, it would a lso not make environmental sense 
due to environmental differences across countries."  The OECD had outlined practical problems in 
implementing measures based on LCA, including difficulties in determining the environmental impact 
for products, comparing the se impacts across products, and the high cost of this assessment.  Canada's 
draft Decision would use ISO 14000 as its basis.  It had already been acknowledged that ISO 14000 
needed to improve on areas such as public access, the link between compliance and environmental 
performance, and qualification requirements.  It would be interesting to learn which procedures were 
followed for inspection and certification for developing countries.  Sierra Leone noted the weak 
provisions in the TBT Agreement on the conce pts of mutual recognition and equivalencies.  Reference 
was made to mutual recognition for technical regulations, but not for standards and there was no reference 
to equivalencies.  She suggested the CTE consider how to include mutual recognition and equiv alencies 
in the TBT Agreement.  
 
29. The representative of Mexico  asked for clarification on the difference between scope and 
coverage and measures and programmes in Canada's draft Decision.  He asked if mandatory 
eco-labelling measures were the same as technical regulations in the TBT Agreement.  If so, then there 
was no doubt as to their coverage.  He asked whether there was anything new in the draft Decision 
compared to the existing TBT Agreement.  On paragraph 4, he asked Canada for examples of 
international standards that were being developed and whether this was an  indirect reference to ISO work. 
In his view, this paragraph prejudged the issue;  the only way not to prejudge was not to refer to the 
matter.  Mexico's position was that non -product -related PPMs were not legitimized by WTO rules.  
Before progress could b e made, the trade effects of eco -labelling should be clarified.  He preferred to 
discuss eco -labelling with the other issues under Item 3 and not in isolation.  
 
30. The representative of Japan  said there were elements of Japan's posi tion in the EC non -paper, 
such in paragraphs 8 and 10.  He supported the first points in the preamble of Canada's draft Decision.  
Japan agreed that the issue of non -product -related, PPM -based criteria should be further studied.    
 
31. The representative of Korea  said, although his delegation supported Canada's draft Decision, 
Korea was not convinced paragraphs 1 and 5 were compatible.  The relationship between LCA and the 
TBT Agreement should be clarified before addressing the trade  effects of eco -labelling schemes.  In this 
regard, Korea shared the view expressed by the EC in paragraph 13.  He sought clarification of the 
meaning of the references to scope and coverage, as well as the development of international standards 
based on L CA.  Korea felt it was premature to draw partial conclusions on eco -labelling given the 
implications and unanswered questions it raised.  
 
32. The representative of Hong Kong  supported paragraphs 1, 2, 4 and 5 of Canada's draft Decisi on. 
The recommendation in paragraph 4 would be easier to accept if the second line read "should consider 
as part of its future work programme the need to analyse the impact ... ".  He asked Canada to clarify 
whether there were implications of developing in ternational standards based on LCA for the 
interpretation of "like product".  
 WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 6 
 
33. The representative of Egypt  said that it was premature to have a decision on eco -labelling in 
Singapore and that eco -labelling should be dealt with co mprehensively after Singapore.  
 
34. The representative of Venezuela  agreed with Sierra Leone that analysis should focus on mutual 
recognition and environmental equivalencies.  He indicated that in doing so attention should be given to 
work undertaken by the ISO and UNEP's expert group on eco -labelling.  
 
35. The representative of Bangladesh  said the growing number of eco -labelling schemes for products 
of developing country export interest were a matter of concer n.  An element of protectionism was felt to 
be hidden in eco -labelling schemes.  The costs to firms that wished to comply with eco -labelling criteria 
might be significant.  For example, an Indian study reported that for some firms the costs of testing the 
product to comply with the requirements of the Dutch eco -label for footwear could lead to a cost increase 
of about 50 per cent.  Eco -labelling schemes were based on LCA which meant products must have less 
environmental impact during their life cycle.  This  was difficult to assess.  As the co -existence of more 
than one eco -labelling scheme for the same product compounded the problems, there was a need to 
harmonize eco -labelling schemes to minimize the difficulties for developing country exporters.  Existing 
eco-labelling schemes should be examined to be aware of the concerns of developing countries, which 
should be taken into account when developing eco -labels.  Analysis of the costs and benefits of 
eco-labelling schemes would be useful.  Efforts towards a mu ltilateral understanding on criteria for eco -
labels should be made as value judgements were involved.  The proliferation of eco -labelling schemes 
without any multilateral agreement would further marginalize LLDC's.  The offer of technical assistance 
for ad justment to eco -labelling schemes appeared to be diversionary.  The development dimension 
should be linked with the issue of eco -labelling.  Development of environmentally -friendly products 
would require a substantial amount of financing, which should be i ncluded in official development 
assistance.  Article 12 of the TBT Agreement should also be kept in mind.  Eco -labelling could not be 
treated as a fait accompli  and all its aspects should be considered before reaching a decision.  
 
36. The representative of India  said his delegation's non -paper on Item 3 sought to broaden the focus 
of discussion.  The time was not right for the Report to contain any conclusions on eco -labelling.  
Voluntary eco -labelling had not been demonstrated to be an effective market -based instrument which 
encouraged environmentally -preferable products and services in terms of WTO provisions.  The 
effectiveness of eco -labelling programmes needed to be tested and discussed further, particularly with 
regard to their i mpact on developing countries.  As there had not been much experience with the impact 
of such programmes on services, this portion of Canada's draft Decision could be examined in future 
work.  India asked for clarification of the impact of LCA on developin g country trading prospects.  It 
was not clear whether eco -labelling would promote or obstruct the WTO commitment to an open, non -
discriminatory and equitable trading system.  Prima facie, India's view was that eco -labelling 
requirements, including the use  of environmentally -friendly technologies and products should be assessed 
in future work.  He sought clarification on the ability of developing countries to participate effectively in 
the formulation of eco -labels.  Issues such as the transfer of appropria te technology and the use of criteria 
which were verifiable and scientifically -based were important.  India said reference should be made to 
the special WTO provisions for developing countries, such as Article 12 of the TBT Agreement.  
 
37. The representative of Australia  said differences of view remained on the extent to which standards 
based on non -product -related PPMs were or should be covered by the TBT Agreement.  Although 
agreement on this issue was unlikely in Singapore, it s hould be possible to agree on the desirability of eco -
labelling schemes adhering to the TBT Code of Good Practice.  Future work could examine whether 
this Code and the provisions of the TBT Agreement were adequate to address the issues raised by eco -
labell ing schemes.  Discussion should distinguish between:  (i) the applicability of the TBT Agreement 
to labels, irrespective of the kind of information provided on the label;  (ii)  the disciplines that should 
apply to eco -labelling schemes as standardizing bod ies;  and (iii) the extent to which the criteria used in 
awarding labels to particular products were standards (or technical regulations) as defined by the TBT 
Agreement.  On the first point, a consideration was the CTBT's decision that the obligation to n otify 
mandatory labelling requirements "is not dependent on the kind of information provided on the label, 
whether it is in the nature of a technical specification or not".  While it only applied to mandatory labelling          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 7 
 
requirements, it pointed to the princ iple that labels were covered by the TBT Agreement.  On the 
second, most eco -labelling schemes involved some criteria which related to a product's characteristics or 
performance.  In relation to these activities, the eco -labelling scheme itself would seem to be clearly 
covered by the TBT Agreement as a standardizing body.  There might be uncertainty on the third issue 
on the status of criteria dealing with product characteristics and product -related PPMs and those dealing 
with non -product -related PPMs.  A f irst step would be to agree in principle and for the Report to endorse 
that the TBT Agreement covered:  (i) eco -labels irrespective of the kind of information provided on the 
label;  and (ii) the practices of eco -labelling schemes as standardizing bodies.  Further work in 
cooperation with the CTBT on the application of the TBT Agreement to the criteria used by eco -labelling 
schemes should examine the extent to which the criteria applied by eco -labelling schemes were standards 
(or technical regulations) as d efined in the TBT Agreement and the adequacy of the TBT disciplines, 
including the Code of Good Practice, in addressing the concerns raised by eco -labelling schemes.   
 
38. The representative of Canada  clarified that his delegation's  draft Decision had been submitted 
for discussion of Section III of the Report.  On the link between scope and coverage, a better distinction 
might be scope in a general and specific sense.  Eco -labelling programmes were within the general scope 
of the TBT  Agreement.  However, the question of whether specific measures within eco -labelling 
programmes such as standards based on non -product -related PPMs fell within the scope of the TBT 
Agreement needed to be determined.  In terms of measures and programmes, Ca nada could agree to 
limit the reference to programmes.  Given the difference between a technical regulation for mandatory 
programmes and standards for voluntary programmes, the issue of PPMs only related to the latter.  
Canada's interpretation of the TBT A greement was there was nothing new contained in paragraphs 1, 2, 
and 3 of the draft Decision.  Eco -labelling programmes were covered and should be notified under the 
TBT Agreement, as Canada had done.  However, this view was not universally shared and need ed to be 
explicitly reaffirmed.  On paragraph 4, it was useful to recognize work in international fora on the 
development of standards based on LCA.  Canada would reflect on Hong Kong and Sierra  Leone's 
drafting suggestions.  Canada was not sure what the i mpact of LCA would be on "like product" and 
discussion of this could be part of future work.  The reference to services was a result of Canada's eco -
labelling programme which had a number of service -related criteria.  
 
Item 9  The work programme envisaged in  the Decision on Trade in Services and the Environment  
 
39. The representative of India  introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 23  July 1996), which 
proposed the Report recommend this Item be included in future CTE work.  There was a separate 
Ministerial Decision on this subject, the Council for Trade in Services had entrusted the work programme 
contained in the Decision on Trade in Services and the Environment to the CTE, and CTE discussion 
had been exploratory, with interest ex pressed for further analysis.  
 
 
Items 1 & 5  The relationship between the provisions of the multilateral trading system and trade 
measures for environmental purposes, including those pursuant to multilateral 
environmental agreements  
 
The relationship betwee n the dispute settlement mechanisms in the multilateral trading system and 
those found in multilateral environmental agreements  
 
40. The representative of Singapore, on behalf of ASEAN , introduced her delegation's proposal 
(WT O/CTE/W /39) for a multi -year, case -by-case waiver accompanied by non -binding guidelines.  
ASEAN's proposal was built on a distinction between specific and non -specific trade measures pursuant 
to MEAs and extended to existing and future MEAs.  Specific trade measu res in MEAs might be 
recognized on a case -by-case basis as exceptional circumstances qualifying for a WTO Article IX waiver, 
subject to the application of non -binding guidelines.  These included necessity and the related criteria of 
least trade restrictive ness, effectiveness, proportionality and degree of scientific evidence.  In this context, 
measures needed to be examined to avoid their abuse for protectionist purposes.  It had often been 
argued that discriminatory trade provisions vis-à-vis non-parties w ere necessary in MEAs to overcome the WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 8 
 
problem of "free riders".   Although ASEAN was supportive of multilateral efforts to address 
environmental concerns, it felt discriminatory trade measures should not be used to coerce countries to 
become signatories to  an MEA.  Instead, the free rider problem should be resolved through the use of 
positive measures and trade with non -parties should be permitted if a non -party was in conformity with 
an MEA's requirements or obligations.  The requirements for a waiver woul d help ensure discriminatory 
trade provisions vis-à-vis non-parties would only be used if absolutely necessary to attain an MEA's 
objectives.  On non -specific trade measures pursuant to MEAs and the use of unilateral trade measures 
not pursuant to MEAs, AS EAN advocated the maintenance of the status quo.  Under the current scope 
of Article XX, it was not possible to take such extra -jurisdictional measures against other WTO Members 
to protect extra -jurisdictional environmental resources.  This should remain the case.  WTO Members 
should formally agree not to resort in future to the use of non -specific measures pursuant to MEAs and 
the use of unilateral trade measures to protect extra -jurisdictional environmental resources.  WTO 
Members' right to resort  to the DSU should be preserved concerning measures for which a waiver had 
been granted as pursuant to the Understanding in Respect of Waivers of Obligations under GATT 1994.  
In line with the DSU, ASEAN proposed that in the case of environment -related dis putes, panels might 
resort to the use of independent external experts.  The benefits of a multi -year waiver were that it was 
temporary, which allowed the opportunity to revisit the area and it preserved the WTO's role as a trade 
regulating body.  The major ity decision required for an MEA to be granted a waiver would reflect 
agreement that the environmental issue in question was of multilateral concern, without there being a 
need for the WTO to arrive at a definition of an MEA.  ASEAN's view was that the Min isterial 
Conference was a point in a continuum and not the end -point.  She said that discussion had focused on 
Item 1 and had inadequately dealt with market access under Item 6, which should be kept in perspective 
as countries were dependent on trade as a source of economic growth.  
 
41. The representative of Hong Kong  introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 22  July 1996), 
which identified:  (i) the perception by MEA negotiators of WTO obligations;   
(ii) the status of MEA -based t rade measures in the context of WTO rules;  and (iii) the respective 
competences of WTO and MEA dispute settlement provisions.  In responding to these issues, the CTE 
would have addressed one of its main tasks, namely to ensure the compatibility of trade m easures in 
MEAs and the WTO.  Hong Kong proposed:  (i) that the WTO provide MEA negotiators with the best 
advice possible to promote the compatibility of  MEA -based trade measures with the WTO, without 
intervening in MEA negotiations.  To this end, Hong Ko ng proposed the establishment of a WTO 
Guide for reference by MEA negotiators setting out WTO principles and obligations to be observed 
when trade measures were being considered in MEAs.  This Guide would be supplemented by briefings 
between MEAs and the W TO through their respective secretariats, which should cover, inter alia , trade 
measures under consideration for incorporation in the MEA and WTO provisions relevant to their use;  
(ii) that an arrangement be devised whereby a multi -year waiver might be gr anted to trade measures taken 
pursuant to an MEA, subject to certain criteria having been met.  Hong Kong proposed a set of guidelines 
be established for granting a multi -year waiver based on the criteria in the headnote to 
GATT  Article  XX, and provide for  tests of genuine international consensus, least inconsistency with 
WTO provisions, least trade restrictiveness, effectiveness, and proportionality.  For trade measures 
specifically mandated in an MEA, the necessity test under Article XX might be dispensed  with.  A multi -
year waiver, once granted, would be subject to a summary review procedure in the form of "negative 
vetting".  The review would enable the granting of an annual extension, provided there had been no 
change in the original circumstances which  had justified the waiver.  This would afford security to 
legitimate actions to resolve environmental problems over an extended period of time;  (iii) that WTO 
Members who were MEA Parties might opt, voluntarily and based on mutual consent, to resolve disp utes 
in the MEA's dispute settlement mechanisms.  Any WTO Members who wished to resort to the DSU 
to resolve a dispute related to an MEA -based trade measure must be permitted to do so, irrespective of 
whether that Member was an MEA Party and whether or wha t MEA dispute settlement provisions were 
available.   
 
42. The representative of India  introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 23 July 1996) on Items 
1 and 5, which described India's view that experience with the GATT/WTO disput e settlement 
mechanism in dealing with trade measures for environmental purposes, including those pursuant to          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 9 
 
MEAs, had not demonstrated any need to recommend changes to existing provisions of GATT 1994. 
These provisions were adequate to deal with trade me asures in existing MEAs.  By analysing trade 
measures in MEAs in isolation from other measures and not limited to existing MEAs which fulfilled 
certain criteria, the CTE might encourage dependence on trade measures to achieve environmental 
objectives, ther eby legitimizing the unilateral use of trade measures as sanctions against countries to 
enforce non -trade issues.  Existing DSU provisions appeared adequate to meet any demand to provide 
environmental expertise in dispute cases involving trade -related envi ronmental measures.  Keeping in 
mind the interest in this issue and the WTO's evolving nature, India suggested it continue to be examined 
after the Ministerial Conference.  
 
43. The representative of Venezuela  asked ASEAN for clarification as to whether the proposed 
multi -year waiver was for the trade measure in the MEA or the MEA itself.  Venezuela was not in favour 
of waiving the WTO rights of MEA non -parties.  
 
44. The representative of  Mexico  supported India's proposed recommendations to be contained in 
the Report that WTO provisions were adequate to deal with trade measures in MEAs;  such trade 
measures should take into account WTO provisions;  and the DSU was adequate to deal with any  
environment -related trade dispute.  Future problems might result due to a lack of coordination at the 
national level, but not as a result of any shortcoming of WTO provisions.  One major advantage of the 
WTO was that its provisions were not tailored to no n-trade policy needs.  It was this characteristic of the 
WTO that ensured governments' freedom to adopt environmental policies in accordance with their 
priorities without infringing on WTO rules.  
 
45. The representative of Nigeria  said the proposals on this Item revealed the complexity of the issues 
and the need to keep discussion on Item 1 open -ended, representative and transparent.  He agreed with 
India that international cooperation based on positive measures to resolve environment al externalities 
was preferable to discriminatory trade measures.  There was a need to distinguish, as had ASEAN and 
Korea, between specific and non -specific trade measures in MEAs, and to exclude unilateral measures.  
Hong Kong's proposal for a WTO Guide merited consideration.  Based on a set of guidelines, the 
exclusion of the necessity test represented a compromise which should be considered carefully.  A multi -
year waiver would offer the opportunity to monitor the problematic relationship between MEAs a nd the 
WTO.  In supporting India's proposal, he said it was time to think of a structured CTE work programme 
for the post -Singapore period taking into account current proposals.  
 
46. The representative of Egypt  understood it had been  agreed that there would be no limit for 
written proposals.  She reiterated Egypt's comments on Item 1 which had been circulated to delegations 
(dated 18 June 1996).  Before assessing any proposals, a necessary starting point was to define what 
constituted  an MEA.  Egypt favoured the status quo  as contained in Article XX, along with the ex post  
waiver approach.  ASEAN's multi -year waiver combined with a WTO Guide should be considered in 
the CTE's post -Singapore work programme.  
 
47. The representative of Switzerland  said the objective under this Item was to determine relations 
between two instruments of international law on a lasting basis without creating any hierarchical 
relationship between them.  The use of a waiver approach, even o n a multi -year basis, would commit 
Members to a timetable.  WTO Article IX provided for waivers in exceptional circumstances.  As 
MEAs negotiated with broad -based participation could not be considered to be an exceptional 
circumstance, Switzerland had rese rvations on a waiver -based approach.  Also, ASEAN's criteria for 
granting a waiver were a restrictive interpretation of WTO rules.  He felt ASEAN's proposal would 
impose additional constraints and would restrict the use of trade measures in MEAs which were  necessary 
to meet their environmental objectives.  
 
48. The representative of Sierra Leone  supported efforts to address transboundary environmental 
problems based on multilateral consensus and recognized the usefulness of trade restr ictions mandated 
in an MEA with broad participation.  However, efforts to accommodate such measures in the WTO 
could lead to protectionist abuse and restrict trade.  Sierra Leone did not support putting trade interests WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 10 
 
above environmental protection.  As t here had never been a formal dispute involving a trade measure in 
an MEA and the WTO contained exceptions which could be used for environmental protection, she 
questioned the magnitude of the problem.  The issues needed to be reassessed in light of the App ellate 
Body Report on Reformulated Gasoline.  After analysing this Report and considering the current 
proposals on this Item, Sierra Leone felt the interpretation of Article XX was evolving in a way that could 
be beneficial to environmental protection.  Sh e wondered if this process should be disrupted with new 
rules and criteria.  The goal was to provide for environmental protection without such measures 
becoming unnecessary trade barriers.  The Appellate Body's interpretation of Article XX might already 
provide for this.  The measure must fit one of the exceptions in Article XX(b), (d) or (g).  For example, 
to fulfil the requirements for (g), a measure did not have to be "necessary".  This suggested that it was 
easier than had been thought to justify a meas ure under Article XX.  Once it was found to fit under one 
of the exceptions, the measure was then judged under the headnote of Article XX.  According to the 
Appellate Body Report, the purpose of the headnote was to "avoid abuse or illegitimate use of the 
exceptions to substantive rules available in Article XX" and it was not meant to be restrictive, but was 
designed to ensure exceptions were not abused.  This was the kind of effect the CTE hoped to achieve 
on this issue.  This two -tiered approach allowed WT O exceptions for environmental measures if they 
were not an unjustifiable trade restriction.  Future work could analyse the Appellate Body Report, in the 
light of which an interpretive statement of WTO Members' understanding of Article XX could be agreed.  
This would contribute to establishing whether a problem existed, and identifying its nature.  
 
49. Sierra Leone felt ASEAN's proposal for a waiver was useful as it advocated a cautious approach 
to a complex issue.  However, a waiver also implied a fundamental conflict between MEAs and the 
WTO which would undermine the equal status of the legal obligations under both systems.  A waiver 
would include reference to the "exceptional circumstances" relied on to obtain it, which suggested th e 
MEA had been accepted on sufferance.  Where trade was the cause of the global environmental 
problem, trade measures had proven useful in assisting national agencies to come up with first -best policy 
options to tackle the environmental problem.  Where tra de was not the cause and would not serve as a 
catalyst for the use of first -best policy options, trade measures should be avoided.  The free -rider problem 
should be dealt with through technology transfer and technical assistance;  trade should not be used to 
coerce countries into becoming parties to agreements.  On ASEAN's reference to the need for certainty 
and predictability, Sierra Leone felt a distinction should be made between trade -restrictive measures 
specifically mandated in an MEA, trade -restrictiv e measures authorized or envisaged in an MEA, and 
trade -restrictive measures connected with an MEA's implementation, including national measures to 
implement commitments in framework MEAs.  The question was then how to distinguish between trade -
restrictive  measures in the latter category from unilateral measures taken for protectionist purposes.   
 
50. Sierra Leone was not convinced of the usefulness of non -binding guidelines.  In examining 
criteria which were contained in several pro posals, least -trade restrictive and proportionality were 
elements of "necessary" as it had been interpreted by panels.  She agreed effectiveness was not used in 
WTO rules, nor had it been referred to per se  by WTO panels.  However, effectiveness was also i mplied 
by "necessary".  The Appellate Body had rightly questioned the "effects test" for measures concerning 
conservation of natural resources due to the delay in observing their effects.  She understood the idea of 
effectiveness used in several proposals as not questioning the usefulness of a particular measure in 
achieving its goal, but rather the choice of that measure as the most effective approach available.  She 
suggested the "effectiveness" principle be referred to as the "first -best approach" princi ple.  This principle 
was already used in the international arena, especially in conjunction with the recognition that 
environmental problems were best tackled at their source.  Viewing these two principles together, the use 
of policy options like technolog y transfer and technical assistance for environmental purposes became 
preferable to trade -restrictive measures.  Sierra Leone supported ASEAN's call to shift the focus from 
Item 1 to Item 6.  She agreed with Nigeria on the need for broad -based, transparent  discussion and for 
these issues to be included in future work.  
 
51. The representative of Korea  said ASEAN and Hong Kong's proposals were encouraging as they 
adopted approaches based on the specificity of the trade measure and prese rved WTO Members' right 
to invoke the DSU.  He supported the points in paragraph 2 of Hong Kong's           WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 11 
 
non-paper.  He asked who would assess the criteria for the non -binding guidelines and the "negative 
vetting" and how.  He said the "negative -vetting" approac h would give more flexibility to the operation of 
a waiver.  He asked for clarification of paragraph 20 of ASEAN's paper.   
 
52. The representative of the European Communities  was disappointed by the lack of ambition in 
the CTE on th is Item.  He agreed with Switzerland that the objective was not to make the work of MEA 
negotiators more difficult.  If necessary, rules should be drafted to increase positive interaction between 
MEAs and the WTO and achieve positive results in Singapore.  In the examination of the relationship 
between the WTO and MEAs, much time had been devoted to the role of Article XX(b).  Developments 
in jurisprudence following the Appellate Body Report on Reformulated Gasoline indicated the 
importance of Article XX(g)  in settling questions related to trade and the environment.  Trade measures 
in MEAs could be equally covered by Article XX(b) and (g) and should be handled on a case -by-case 
basis.  Although elements of the Appellate Body Report should be included in the discussion, the Report 
had not settled the relationship between MEAs and WTO rules.  The legal uncertainty at the origin of 
the discussion remained.  
 
53. The representative of Japan  was encouraged by ASEAN and Hong Kong's proposals, which 
showed they would accept some criteria and contained some common ground with Japan's proposal.  
WTO disciplines would enhance predictability, legal certainty and avoid conflict.  To this end, the sole 
use of a waiver was not sufficient.  To have posi tive results in Singapore, flexibility should be shown.  To 
facilitate consensus, Japan was willing to support discussion based on differentiated disciplines for MEAs 
depending on the definition of specific and non -specific trade measures in MEAs.   
 
54. The representative of Colombia  supported India's analysis of the issues, especially paragraph 15.  
Colombia was not convinced of the need to modify WTO rules as existing provisions provided an 
adequate framework to deal with trade -related measures in MEAs.  
 
55. The representative of Pakistan  agreed with Nigeria that discussion on this Item had not been 
exhausted and should continue after Singapore.   
 
56. The representative of the United States  said his delegation's comments on Hong Kong's non -
paper were also relevant t o ASEAN's paper.  The waiver approach was not an appropriate mechanism 
to clarify the relationship between MEA trade measures and the WTO.  A WTO Article IX waiver had 
been designed to provide temporary derogation from WTO obligations and not to accommodat e 
international agreements.  The US had doubts about Hong Kong's proposed WTO Guide given that 
WTO obligations already were compiled in the Final Act and it was difficult to imagine an abridged 
version;  any attempt to create one would more likely confuse than clarify matters, such as for "like 
product" for which there was no set definition.  Finding the right balance to address the relationship 
between MEAs and the WTO was a demanding task.  The US had devoted time at the national level to 
this without bei ng able to develop a proposal describing this evolving relationship in a way that dealt with 
its complexities.  A balanced approach must be taken to secure the confidence of both trade and 
environment policy makers.  Close coordination between trade and en vironment officials both at the 
national and international levels, including in the CTE, was essential.  In this respect, he referred to the 
meeting of the Biodiversity Convention to develop a BioSafety Protocol, where delegations had taken 
positions on tr ade measures which were at odds with their CTE positions.  MEA trade provisions had 
not been challenged and could be avoided by ensuring trade officials were involved in MEA negotiations 
relating to trade.  Common threads describing the relationship betwee n MEA trade measures and the 
WTO were that there was broad appreciation that trade liberalization and environmental protection 
should be mutually supportive in favour of sustainable development;  MEAs were important to address 
global environmental problems ;  the use of trade measures in MEAs would continue to be an effective 
tool to achieve global environmental objectives;  trade measures were not always needed and should be 
used prudently;  WTO rules should provide sufficient flexibility to allow trade mea sures to be used in 
MEAs;  that when negotiating trade measures in MEAs between Parties, governments should consider 
how they intended these provisions to relate to WTO rules;  that an MEA non -party not be discriminated 
against if it took equivalent action  to that required for Parties;  coordination between trade and WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 12 
 
environment officials in capitals was important;  and avoiding disputes entailed ensuring the involvement 
of trade officials in MEA negotiations.   
 
57. The representativ e of Canada  recalled his delegation's intervention at the June 1996 meeting, 
reviewing the proposals and outlining Canada's position.  Recent discussion had suggested the need to 
elaborate Canada's objectives and develop points of convergence.  While there  were significant 
differences in approaches in the proposals, there was agreement on where the least and most difficult 
issues arose.  To provide Ministers with recommendations in Singapore, the CTE must agree on 
common elements in the proposals.  Although  Canada no longer favoured an Article IX waiver to 
accommodate MEAs, it was useful to have this option on the table.  He understood that another 
delegation might table a paper proposing that no change from the status quo  was required.  He hoped it 
would ta ke into account the Appellate Body Report on Reformulated Gasoline with respect to clarifying 
various paragraphs of, and the headnote to Article XX.  While delegates were in the WTO in their 
capacity as trade officials, they represented their governments' position as a whole.  Just as environmental 
colleagues in MEA negotiations were expected to take into account trade considerations, WTO trade 
officials needed to take into account environmental considerations to make trade and environment 
mutually supporti ve.  The focus should be on how to avoid conflicts between MEAs and the WTO, and 
should not appear to undermine what had been agreed elsewhere multilaterally.  The latter approach 
would lead to unnecessary criticism of the WTO and was not good trade nor go od environmental policy.   
 
58. The representative of Nigeria  agreed with the US that coordination between trade and 
environment officials was necessary and not modification to WTO rules.  
 
59. The representativ e of Peru  felt that it was not advisable to modify Article XX.  From the 
proposals which had been submitted, there was a range of alternative options which would permit a 
consensus to be reached on this matter.  
 
60. The representative of Hong  Kong  responded to comments on her delegation's non -paper, which 
should be viewed in light of the CTE's mandate.  There should be no confusion between "whether 
modifications are required" and "what modifications are required" as the latter could not be pre sumed.  
Switzerland had commented on the appropriateness of applying the waiver approach to MEA -based trade 
measures and that two different multilateral systems were involved.  The use of a waiver was appropriate 
as it resolved the inconsistencies between MEAs and the WTO without placing one legal system above 
the other.  The fact that waivers provided for medium or long term WTO exceptions spoke for their 
validity to resolve environmental problems.  Only if a waiver could not resolve the issues would the 
question of modifying WTO provisions arise;  this was not the present case.  Switzerland and the EC 
had noted the "exceptional" circumstances of granting or renewing waivers.  If it were the "exceptional" 
nature of the circumstances that caused objection to  their use, then Hong Kong would like to know more 
about the arguments behind this.  Exceptions should not be converted into the norm.  She appreciated 
Nigeria's comment that exclusion of the necessity test would have to be considered carefully for waivers  
concerning MEA -based trade measures.  Hong Kong's proposals were ambitious.  She said WTO 
Members would test the applicability of guidelines for a waiver and that of the negative vetting approach 
when they decided on a multi -year waiver.  She agreed with the US that it was not possible to provide a 
comprehensive guide to WTO principles.  However, Hong Kong's proposal for enhanced 
communication between the WTO and MEA Bodies would help in this regard.  
 
Item 4  The provisions of the multilateral trading syste m with respect to the transparency of trade 
measures used for environmental purposes and environmental measures and requirements 
which have significant trade effects  
 
61. The representative of Hong Kong  said his delegation's proposal  for an environmental  database 
(non-paper dated 28 May 1996) could be developed from information contained in the Central Registry 
of Notifications (CRN).  As noted in WT/CTE/W/34, secondary information could be generated from 
the CRN on trade -related env ironmental measures, including the patterns and types of measures and the 
number of notifications.  It was clear that certain information would not be available, such as the volume          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 13 
 
of trade involved, or WTO conformity of measures.  Concerning the need to a void duplication in the 
case of the proposed environmental enquiry points, Hong Kong suggested Members could provide 
information on trade -related environmental measures through existing or new national enquiry points or 
relevant authorities.   
 
62. The representative of Japan  supported Hong Kong's proposal for the establishment of a database 
on the understanding any additional notification obligations would not be burdensome.  
 
63. The representative of Peru  said Hong Kong's proposals to enhance transparency were positive.  
However, the proposal for the TPRM to include trade -related environmental measures was not 
compatible with its objectives in so far as it might create additional obligations for the Member unde r 
review.   
 
64. The representative of Nigeria  recalled the TPRM was not intended to serve as a basis for the 
enforcement of specific obligations under the DSU or to impose new policy commitments.  
 
65. The representative of the United States  said the SPS and TBT enquiry points h ad been a 
considerable investment, but the US had committed the necessary resources as these enquiry points were 
important to the effective functioning of those Agreements.  To give these enquiry points broad, new 
responsibilities would require a commitmen t of additional resources.  He said the benefit of an 
environmental enquiry point was not clear and environmental measures did not require a greater amount 
of scrutiny than any other measures.    
 
Item 6  The effects of environmental measures on market acce ss, especially to developing countries, in 
particular to the least developed among them, and environmental benefits of removing trade 
restrictions and distortions  
 
66. The representative of the United States  introduced his delegation 's paper (WT/CTE/W/35) 
which expanded on Argentina and Australia's proposals so that common ground could be reached.  
While the paper's specific points were pertinent to the agricultural sector, the economic theory that 
supported them was relevant to almos t all segments of any country's economy.  The effect of freer trade 
on environmental quality depended on what happened to the level of economic activity and associated 
pollution, the intersectoral changes in economic activity, and changes in production met hods.  The 
effects also depended on whether appropriate, or optimal, environmental protection was already in place.  
Well -designed and enforced environmental policies were more likely to ensure trade liberalization would 
bring economic growth and environme ntal improvement.  In the long term, economic growth and higher 
incomes engendered by freer trade might lead to a greater social preference for and the resources available 
to achieve environmental improvements.  Removing agricultural distortions that affec ted the relative 
price of food products and farm input prices along with the implementation of sound environmental 
policies would change economic incentives and benefit the environment.  The CTE should identify "win -
win" situations in other areas as well.  He recalled the five propositions highlighted in the paper.  The 
CTE needed to present a positive Report recommending that Ministers endorse the principles contained 
in paragraph 34 of the US paper so the WTO could further the goal of sustainable developm ent. 
 
67. The representative of Australia  introduced his delegation's paper (WT/CTE/W/36), which noted 
that an underlying theme in the CTE's work was the relationship between trade liberalization, the 
environment and the promotion of  sustainable development.  It pointed out that the preamble to the 
Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO clearly stated Members' desire to conduct their relations in 
the field of trade and economic endeavour in a way which allowed for the optimal use of  global resources 
in accordance with the objective of sustainable development.  In paragraph 3, Australia's proposed five 
key elements which should figure in the Report.  Recommendations for a continuing work programme 
were contained in paragraph 4.  The p aper also outlined some issues that should be addressed in relation 
to low -income commodity -dependent countries and agricultural trade reform.  The paper was aimed at 
ensuring that the Ministerial Conference endorsed a positive message about the contributi on of a strong 
multilateral trading system to promoting sustainable development.  The WTO could not ignore the WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 14 
 
increased community interest in WTO work and expressions of concern that there was a conflict between 
WTO objectives and the promotion of environ mental quality.  The trade and environment debate posed 
both challenges and opportunities for the WTO.  The challenges concerned the danger of protectionist 
interests using environmental justifications to put up trade barriers.  Even when there was no prot ectionist 
intent, some environmental measures still had the potential to create trade barriers.  These challenges 
pointed to the need for dialogue and cooperation to ensure countries were able to address environmental 
concerns in ways that did not create u nnecessary trade barriers.  Developing countries, in particular, had 
expressed concern that their access to markets and competitiveness might be affected by environmental 
initiatives, such as eco -labelling schemes.  The opportunities concered the greater c ommunity interest in 
WTO work generated by the trade and environment debate.  This debate was an opportunity to draw 
public attention to the WTO's role in promoting sustainable development.  The CTE provided a forum 
for examining the issues and identifying  the WTO's role in preventing environmental measures becoming 
unnecessary trade barriers.  Australia requested its paper be derestricted.  
 
68. The representative of the European Communities  introduced her delegation's non -paper (date d 
19 July 1996).  The broad policy approaches adopted on this Item were likely to inform positions on 
other Items, so it was essential to achieve a balance between the trade, environment and development 
aspects of the debate.  In principle, the trade commu nity should welcome development of newer types 
of environmental measures, such as voluntary eco -labelling which tended to be less trade -restrictive than 
traditional measures.  As such instruments might lead to indirect trade barriers, the EC recognized the  
concerns of developing countries in this regard.  However, as noted in WT/CTE/W/26, "few 
generalisations can be made about the likelihood or otherwise of any particular measure creating, diverting 
or restricting trade in the absence of information about t he particular circumstances under which it 
operates".  There was a clear link with Items 2 and 3 and with the question of developing a framework 
of trade principles which could be applied to environmental measures.  Provisions for environmental 
protection and for taking account of developing country concerns were relevant.  Paragraph 7 outlined 
the considerations that should inform the CTE's case -by-case analysis of newer instruments of 
environmental policy and WTO provisions.  
 
69. The non -paper outlined the view that trade -induced growth need not be incompatible with 
sustainable development.  An open multilateral trading system made possible more efficient resource 
use to achieve any given income level.  The removal of trade restricti ons and distortions was particularly 
important for all countries, including developing countries and LLDC's to promote their integration into 
the global economy.  The conclusion of the Uruguay Round constituted a major achievement, and it was 
import for co mmitments made in the Round to be implemented to ensure the potential benefits were 
realized.  However, environmental benefits were not automatic and required the implementation of 
sustainable development strategies and effective environmental policies at the national and international 
levels.  It was not the level of production, but the means of production which was important to achieve 
sustainable agriculture.  Market mechanisms would only lead to both economically and ecologically 
optimal resource alloca tion with the full internalization of environmental costs.  Sustainable agriculture 
depended on a coherent framework combining environmental, social and economic factors.  Structural, 
regional rural development and land -use policies, including non -distorti ng measures (such as the Green 
Box) were needed to achieve the environmental and social assets which were part of the agricultural 
landscape.  Further work should take account of these considerations, including reference to ongoing 
work in the CSD, UNCTAD,  OECD and FAO.  Although WT/CTE/W/25 helped identify product 
areas where escalation was likely to be most distortionary, the links were not automatic.  Since trade, per 
se, was rarely the direct cause of environmental improvements or damage, it was the ind irect benefits of 
the removal of trade restrictions and distortions rather than their direct benefits which provided 
environmental value.  The links between tariff structures, export restrictions, commodity -dependency 
and the environment remained to be ful ly explored.  Paragraph 25 of the non -paper listed areas for 
further work.  Among the range of "win -win" scenarios, the CTE should consider the scope for 
multilateral approaches to the development of positive incentives to encourage sound environmental 
production.  
          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 15 
 
70. The representative of Korea  introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 24  July 1996), which 
reflected Korea's concern that the availability of evidence on the relationship between government 
policies, trade liberaliza tion and environmental quality was limited.  Any assessment of the agriculture 
sector called for a multi -dimensional approach, taking into account, inter alia , issues related to food 
security before any conclusions were drawn.  Korea called for a broadened  framework to examine this 
issue, taking into account inter alia , transmission mechanisms related to sustainable agriculture and rural 
development, food security, and market failures.  Korea's conclusions were contained in paragraph 21 
of its non -paper.   
 
71. The representative of Sierra Leone  supported Australia's call for future CTE work, especially 
concerning low -income, commodity -dependent countries.  All proposals underlined the premise of the 
relationship between the trade rule s and environmental protection, namely the goal of sustainable 
development.  This should be the case with respect to other Items.  All  proposals identified potential 
"win-win" situations under this Item.  She suggested the Secretariat synthesize the simil ar suggestions to 
facilitate the development of a future work programme.  The strength of Australia's paper was that it 
highlighted the need to consider the diversity of appropriate and effective environmental policies across 
countries.  Sierra Leone saw a  connection between paragraphs 11, 16 and 17 and supported paragraph 
20.   
 
72. The representative of Hong Kong  welcomed Australia's proposal that the Report  recommend 
to Ministers that future work should encompass an analysis of th e relationship between trade liberalization 
and the environment for textiles and clothing, an important sector for developing countries.  Hong Kong 
agreed the analysis should cover a broad set of trade restrictions and distortions which had both trade 
distortive effects and were environmentally -harmful.  The Report should reject any perceptions that there 
was a conflict between trade liberalization and environmental protection and should set out the need for 
a continuing work programme to examine the enviro nmental benefits of removing trade restrictions and 
distortions.  
 
73. The representative of Argentina  said there were many common points between Japan and 
Argentina's submissions:  for example both recognized trade liberalization might contribute to the 
implementation of good environmental policy, that nevertheless, trade liberalization did not in itself 
guarantee the implementation of these policies, that it was necessary to continue the analysis beyond 
Singapore, and that work in other international organisations, such as UNCTAD and the OECD, be 
taken into account.  In dealing with agricultural trade, re ference had been made to quantifying the value 
of the externalities brought about by distortions and restrictions.  However, in order to quantify the value 
of an environmental externality, it had to have been previously identified.  Indeed, the proposals o f 
Argentina, Australia, India, the US and Norway highlighted the need to begin by identifying those 
situations in which there was potential for "win -win" reforms.  The first stage was to identify those sectors 
in which removing distortions would permit the  elimination of negative externalities.  As had been set 
out in many proposals, the agricultural sector must be mentioned in the Report.  He agreed with Japan 
that the focus should not be exclusively on the agricultural sector and should include other sect ors 
identified as able to generate "win -win" results.  The market could not quantify environmental 
externalities in the production process.  The removal or correction of government policies which 
exacerbated negative externalities would allow the identific ation and quantification of market failures and 
permit environmental cost internalization.  He referred to the OECD work in this area.  On India's 
proposal, he agreed improved market access for developing country exports might generate the necessary 
resour ces to enable them to implement environmental policies and set aside resources to finance 
environmental projects.  He referred to the OECD Development Assistance Committee's work in this 
regard.  As in the case of the elimination of agricultural trade dist ortions, the issue was that of 
indispensable prerequisites which would permit the implementation of adequate environmental policies.  
In this respect, market access for developing country exports or the elimination of distortions to trade in 
certain commod ities were not sufficient, but were a necessary condition for the implementation of 
appropriate environmental policies.  
 WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 16 
 
74. The representative of Bangladesh  said there should be discussion of the financing of 
environmental policies and the internalization of environmental externalities, which would not be 
automatic.  It was also necessary to examine the impact of these policies, such as eco -labelling, on the 
development prospects of developing countries.  Their capacity to combat pov erty, adjust to trade 
liberalization and introduce environmental measures should be examined so that a balance could be 
achieved between environmental and other development priorities.  Discussion incorrectly indicated that 
the environment was the only pro blem faced by developing countries.  
 
75. The representative of Japan  said there were many common points between the proposals of Japan 
and Korea.  He agreed with the EC that the Committee on Agriculture was responsibility for overseeing 
the Agricultural Agreement.  In general terms, trade liberalization could have positive  environmental 
effects, but there were various, interrelated factors which should be taken into account, including natural 
and socio -economic conditions and environmental policies in each country.  The US had noted the 
positive environmental effects of agr icultural liberalization, but consideration also should be given to other 
factors.  Empirical analysis was needed on the basis of each country's differentiated natural conditions, 
which could be carried out in collaboration with the OECD and UNCTAD.  He wo uld comment further 
on Australia's paper.  
 
76. The representative of the United States  said that although India's non -paper focused on the 
perspective of developing countries the issues it raised concerning market access were relevan t to all 
countries.  On the promotion of additional market access, the US agreed such improvements could play 
an important role in fostering environmental benefits by creating wealth which could be used to pursue 
environmental goals or enhance efficient re source use.  At the same time, such environmental benefits 
were not automatic and complementary environmental benefits were essential to ensure these benefits 
were realized.  While much had been accomplished by the WTO in improving market access, trade 
liberalization must be sought across the board.  On safeguarding existing market access, the US 
understood India's concern about the potential impact of environmental policies and that green 
protectionism must be guarded against.  He asked India to elaborate the meaning of unwarranted trade 
effects of environmental policies.  There was no reason to assume that provisions related to the 
environment were an area that needed to be singled out for attention.  Referring to India's generalizations 
on the negative ef fect of eco -labelling, he said that, although poorly conceived and implemented eco -
labelling could have negative effects, many types of eco -labelling programmes did not raise such problems.   
 
77. It was decided  to derestrict Austral ia's submission contained in WT/CTE/W/36.  
 
Item 7  The issue of exports of domestically prohibited goods  
 
78. The representative of Switzerland  said there already existed in the context of various international 
conventions an obligati on to notify domestically prohibited goods (DPGs), such as the PIC procedure in 
the London Guidelines.  It was in the context of such conventions that ways should be initially considered 
to improve information exchange on DPG trade.  He agreed with Nigeria  that the WTO's contribution 
in this area should be limited to DPGs which were not subject to existing notification obligations and 
should not duplicate work in other contexts.  WTO action would be of a subsidiary nature.  He said 
that without a sufficient ly precise definition of products covered in Nigeria's draft Decision on DPGs 
(WT/CTE/W/32), it would not be possible to increase transparency without ending up with redundancies 
and repetition of other fora's work.  The definition of banned products shoul d not give rise to any 
difficulties, but that of severely restricted products could give rise to several problems.  As competence 
to define severely restricted products could not be left to each country, Switzerland proposed that those 
products be defined by referring to international agreements where they received specific treatment.  The 
treatment of hazardous wastes gave rise to specific problems which were dealt with in detail in the Basel 
Convention.  This should be considered before deciding to includ e these wastes in a DPG definition.  
The question of technical assistance in Article 2 was being discussed in the Committee on Trade and 
Development in consideration of guidelines on WTO action in this area.  The CTE was not the 
appropriate place to discus s this issue.  Other organisations had the expertise and their contribution in 
this area would be better than that of the WTO.            WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 17 
 
 
79. WTO notification obligations for DPGs must remain subsidiary;  only products which did not 
have to be notified under another international instrument should be notified.  The WTO should limit 
its role to information exchange on regulatory action, which could be accomplished by using information 
in the TBT or SPS Agreements and including these notificati ons under an appropriate heading.  Only 
banned products on the domestic market should be subject to WTO notification.  Extending notification 
obligations to severely restricted products risked an onslaught of notifications which would endanger the 
transpar ency objective of the exercise.  Strengthening cooperation between the WTO and the relevant 
international bodies should contribute to limiting this risk.  Importing countries should be encouraged 
to participate and adhere to international instrument, which  WTO efforts would complement.  As 
Nigeria had stated, participation in related international instruments varied.  In order to provide 
information related to severely restricted products to countries which were not parties to specific 
international instrum ents, TPR reviews could include a chapter describing applicable bans or severe 
restrictions on hazardous goods.  During the review, interested parties could request any other relevant 
information on banned or severely restricted products.  Article 3.1 of N igeria's proposal suggested that 
whenever a banned product was exported a Member should notify each shipment.  This was out of 
proportion and implied disproportionate expenses for producers in view of the objective of transparency.  
As some of the internat ional instruments contained in the draft Decision's Annex II did not contain any 
notification obligations, it would be useful to distinguish between those that had a direct impact and those 
that had a secondary impact.  
 
80. The repre sentative of Japan  asked Nigeria to clarify the product coverage of the draft Decision 
and to provide examples of actual problems concerning DPG imports.  He asked if used cars were 
considered a DPG.  Although the import of used cars was often prohibited i f they did not meet 
environmental standards or failed to obtain certification, they could be exported to some countries.  After 
product coverage had been clarified, it could be decided whether a Decision was necessary.  He asked 
whether DPG exporting count ries had to notify measures concerning a DPG for the first shipment or for 
each subsequent shipment.  
 
81. The representative of Nigeria  said his delegation's draft Decision contained a definition of a DPG.  
Countries designated produ cts as DPGs pursuant to their domestic definition and notified them or this 
basis if there were no obligation to notify in a related international instrument.  WT/CTE/W/14 
addressed the issue of duplication, which had been avoided in Nigeria's proposal.  G iven the lack of 
technical expertise and capacity in some developing countries to determine whether goods were DPGs in 
the exporting country, technical assistance was an integral part of the draft Decision.  Other elements had 
been considered, such as liab ility and compensation, but based on consultations with Members, Nigeria 
had decided to focus on notification given the premise of the problem was lack of information and 
expertise.  Increased transparency through notification would enable importing countr ies to reach 
informed decisions on whether to permit DPG imports.  There were differing views on the administrative 
costs, number of notifications and statistical difficulties involved in Nigeria's proposal.  He noted that the 
EC was able to deal with this  issue at a minimum cost.  In redrafting, there was scope to account for the 
comments on Article 3.1 to clarify that notifications should be made for first time shipments and only if 
necessary thereafter.  In terms of notifications, the TBT and SPS Agreeme nts were inapplicable to DPG -
related problems as these Agreements dealt with specifications and standards for imports and not exports.  
He felt the request for an illustrative list would not serve any useful purpose and the dynamism of 
technology made it i mpossible to produce one.  The draft Decision stated that if a product were defined 
as a DPG and had not been notified under the provisions of any other related instrument, then it should 
be notified to the WTO.  He referred to the fact that even though no  dispute had arisen on the question 
of trade measures in MEAs, there was a willingness to seek a results -oriented solution to further certainty 
and predictability in this area of concern.  He compared this to the situation of DPGs for which concrete 
proble ms existed and recalled the precautionary principle in this respect.   
 
82. The representative of Canada  said concern over duplication had been reduced on the 
understating that if a notification had been made under the TBT or SPS Agr eement on a domestic ban 
or use of a product this would be similar to notifying a DPG.  WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 18 
 
 
83. The representative of the United States  said his delegation had supported efforts in various 
relevant international fora to address DPG -related issues.  The US had doubts as to the role the WTO 
could play in this area.  The US had not asked for an illustrative list as part of a DPG Decision, bu t a 
description example of problems which were not being addressed in other international fora.  It was 
difficult to assess a solution without an adequate understanding of the details of the problem.  To work, 
the notification of the first shipment system required that products were controlled.  As this type of 
control would need to be established in many countries, without a description of the problem, this would 
be a difficult task.  The US supported Hong  Kong's proposal on Item 4 for the Secretariat to c ompile 
trade -related environmental measures which could also address some of Nigeria's concerns.  
 
Item 8Trade -related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and the environment  
 
84. The representative of India  introduced his delegat ion's non -paper (dated 23 July 1996) on the 
TRIPS Agreement and the Framework Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which contained 
several IPR -related obligations.  The TRIPS Agreement recognized IPRs to be private rights and 
incorporated specific obl igations on the issue of patenting life forms to the extent that it obliged Members 
to provide product patents for micro -organisms and non -biological and microbiological processes.  The 
CBD reaffirmed that countries had sovereign rights over their biologic al resources and recognized the 
desirability of sharing equitably the benefits arising from their use.  India suggested the CTE discuss the 
relationship between the CBD and the TRIPS Agreement.  India's suggestions for the reconciliation of 
the TRIPS Agree ment with the CBD were contained in Section IV of the non -paper.  The non -paper 
raised some points for further discussion and did not preclude India from modifying these or raising other 
points in future.  
 
85. The representative of Korea introduced his delegation's non -paper (dated 24  July 1996) 
examining the possibilities for the transfer of environmentally -sound technology (EST) as an instrument 
to achieve MEA objectives.  Korea's non -paper noted that strong IPR protection promoted technological 
development.  Such protection was critical since technology, if it were to be transferred, must exist.  
However, in the context of MEAs, the IPR issue invited attention.  If the use of existing technology were 
controlled, those with the right s for alternative technology were able to exercise stronger monopoly power.  
If the alternative technology under an MEA was monopolized or oligopolized, there seemed to be a 
potential that MEA goals and IPR protection could be rendered mutually exclusive.  Korea's paper 
highlighted two cases concerning the Montreal Protocol which dealt with methyl bromide and HFC 
production.  Although such issues indicated possible gaps surrounding an MEA and the TRIPS 
Agreement, the cases cited in the non -paper were not su fficient to lead to any general conclusions.  Korea 
felt the CTE should remain cautious in rendering a conclusion on this issue and examination should 
continue.  
 
86. The representative of the United States  said the common thread thro ugh India's proposals 
seemed to be ambivalence about the TRIPS Agreement.  He hoped that this was not an attempt to return 
to the negotiating table for issues settled during the Uruguay Round.  The US position was there were no 
contradictions between the T RIPS Agreement and the CBD.  He asked how India dealt with the issue 
of indigenous rights domestically.  He asked for clarification of India's position on Item 1 as compared 
to Item 8.  India's position on Item 1 seemed to be that there was no need for the  WTO to accommodate 
MEAs and that WTO rules were as flexible as they should be with respect to MEAs.  However, on Item 
8, India felt there was room for WTO amendment to help the implementation of the CBD.  He asked 
if India would agree to look at other MEA s to see if changes to WTO Agreements were necessary to 
accommodate them.   
 
87. The US did not feel India's non -paper (dated 20 June 1996) made a case that work in this area 
was needed.  Instead the non -paper pointed to the conclusi on that there was no evidence of conflict 
between the TRIPS Agreement and MEAs or in the transboundary transfer of proprietary 
environmentally -sound technologies and products based on such technologies (EST&Ps).  India's non -
paper was based on a presumptio n that problems existed or would arise for the global use and availability          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 19 
 
of proprietary EST&Ps, which were attributable to IP standards in the TRIPS Agreement.  US 
experience indicated that there had not been a problem with EST&P dissemination among thos e 
countries that had established TRIPS -consistent IP systems.  Instead, problems tended to occur as a 
result of impediments to foreign investment and trade in such products.  Any problems should be 
identified at their source, to the extent they were within  the CTE's mandate, rather than presuming their 
source lay in the TRIPS Agreement.  IP protection was only one of many factors that influenced EST&P 
transfer.  Environmental regulations, the foreign investment climate and market conditions had a more 
direc t effect.  India's non -paper did not reflect factors other than TRIPS standards in its analysis of a 
hypothetical problem of lack of access to proprietary EST&Ps.  India suggested nothing in the TRIPS 
Agreement precluded a Member from revoking a patent.  S everal Articles in the TRIPS Agreement 
clarified that a Member could not summarily revoked patents covering EST&Ps and remain consistent 
with the TRIPS Agreement.  The US could not agree to India's interpretation of Article 16.2 of the CBD 
that suggested A rticle 16.2 imposed a generalized obligation on all developed countries to transfer all 
ESTs on "fair and most favourable" terms to developing countries, regardless of whether they were 
proprietary.  India's non -paper ignored the second sentence of Article  16.2, which clarified that any effort 
of a country to facilitate the transfer of proprietary technology must comply with the TRIPS Agreement's 
obligations through its reference to the necessity for such transfers to be on terms consistent with adequate 
and effective IPR protection.  There was no obligation in the CBD that developed countries provide 
developing countries with proprietary technologies owned by the private sector on "preferential and non -
commercial terms".  
 
88. WT/CTE/W /22 noted that certain technologies were more susceptible to misappropriation 
through copying by their parties without the authority of the right holder.  Concerning paragraph 19 of 
India's non -paper, the US disagreed with the suggestion that misappropriat ion of privately -owned 
proprietary technology should be a goal promoted by the WTO.  Paragraph 20 cast compulsory licensing 
provisions as tools to facilitate technology transfer.  The purpose of compulsory licensing provisions, as 
is evident in Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement, was to provide governments with specific, limited 
remedies for addressing an abuse of patent rights.  The US disagreed that it was more appropriate for 
Members seeking to misappropriate patented technology and trade secrets to go fi rst to the government 
instead of contacting the proprietary technology owner.  India also suggested the TRIPS Agreement 
should be modified to permit Members to reduce the protection term for patent owners to less than the 
20 years from the filing term requ ired by Article 33, which it characterized as a "win -win" situation.  This 
was a "lose -lose" situation, as it served neither the interests of the patent owner, nor the public.  The US 
did not feel India's non -paper demonstrated a need to amend the TRIPS Ag reement.  The US would 
submit written comments on India's non -paper.   
 
89. The representative of the European Communities  drew attention to the non -paper the EC had 
circulated at the TRIPS Council held on 22 -26 July 1996 which state d that the TRIPS Agreement should 
not be weakened by anything which might transpire in the CTE.  
 
90. The representative of Canada  said, without prejudice to the development of new forms of IPRs 
favouring traditional knowledge of indi genous peoples, Canada supported the US comments on India's 
non-papers on the TRIPS Agreement.  Canada's position was that there was no inconsistency between 
the CBD and the TRIPS Agreement, taking "inconsistency" to mean a situation in which, with respect  to 
the same parties and the same subject matter, two treaties contained conflicting provisions which could 
not be complied with simultaneously.  The Dunkel draft of the TRIPS Agreement had already been 
available when Canada had considered signing the CBD,  to which Canada adhered after ensuring that 
there was no conflict between them.  Given that the contributions from India and Korea raised some 
questions about the relationship between IPRs and technology transfer, he said that technology transfer 
had been  extensively discussed during the Uruguay Round.  At that time, it was recognized that most 
domestic regimes maintained laws with respect to anti -competitive practices and that there was a significant 
polarity between the exclusive rights conferred by IP s tatutes and the remedies available to discipline 
"abuse of IPRs".  Canada felt the latter issue was a systemic phenomenon with no special sectoral 
connection to the question of access to ESTs or CTE work.  Moreover, the CTE's attention should be 
directed t o Articles 8.2, 31(k) and 40, which addressed "abuse of IPRs" as an anti -competitive practice.  WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 20 
 
In this connection, it was also relevant to note that possible international disciplines with respect to 
competition law ranked as one of the "new" trade issues  attracting attention within the WTO and other 
fora. 
 
91. The representative of Singapore, on behalf of ASEAN , said he would comment further on the 
proposals on this Item.  Recalling its statement on this Item at the CTE meeting held  in June  1995, he 
said ASEAN would like to be included in any informal consultations on this Item.  
 
92. The representative of Japan  supported the thrust of Korea's non -paper.  Given the priority of 
implementing the TRIPS Agreement, i t was premature to discuss its modification.  Any IPR -related 
problems faced by developing countries should be solved through technical assistance.  
93. The representative of Switzerland  said that IPR protection contributed to the de velopment of 
new technologies which were more environmentally -friendly than older technologies and favoured EST 
transfer.  He supported paragraphs 19 -22 of WT/CTE/W/22 describing the reasons why IP protection 
had a favourable impact on companies carrying o ut technology transfer.  He agreed with the US that IP 
protection was only one of the factors that influenced technology transfer.  Of far more relevance were 
factors such as political stability of the recipient country, infrastructure, access to financial  resources and 
the level of professional training.  Switzerland would need to study the relationship between the TRIPS 
Agreement and the CBD in depth before commenting further.  As the US had noted, it was difficult to 
reconcile India's position on Item 1 with its proposal on Item 8 to amendment the TRIPS Agreement.  
 
94. The representative of India  asked that comments on his delegation's non -paper be submitted in 
writing.  He reiterated India's position on Item 1 was that the provisions of GATT  1994 were adequate 
to deal with MEAs;  India had not addressed WTO provisions.  ASEAN's paper on Item 1 ga ve a wider 
perspective concerning WTO provisions.  
 
95. The representative of Brazil  drew attention to the statement of Brazil's Minister of External 
Relations, H.E. Ambassador Lampreia, on the state of CTE discussion which had been  presented at the 
Lausanne Informal Ministerial Meeting on 1 -2 July 1996.  Brazil had circulated this statement (dated 22 
July 1996) for Members' information.  
 
Item 10  Input to the relevant bodies in respect of appropriate arrangements for relations w ith 
non-governmental organizations referred to in Article V of the WTO  
 
96. The Chairman drew attention to three decisions adopted by the General Council at its meeting 
on 18 July 1996 concerning:  (i) procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents 
contained in WT/L/160/Rev.1;  (ii) guidelines on observer status for international intergovernmental 
organizations contained as an annex to the WTO rules of procedure in WT/L/161;  and (iii) guidelines 
for arrangements on  relations with non -governmental organizations pursuant to Article V:2 of the WTO 
Agreement contained in WT/L/162.  He noted the latter two decisions were related to the CTE's 
discussion on Item 10.  If it were agreed by the CTE, he said reference would be  made to these decisions 
in the Report.  
 
97. The representatives of India , Mexico  and Nigeria  said these decisions should be placed before 
the CTE in order to take a decision on how best to reflect them in the Report.  
 
98. The representative of Australia  said discussion in the CTE on these decisions would only serve 
to duplicate work in the General Council.  Australia would not agree to anything different in any other 
Committee than that which had been already a dopted by his Government in the General Council.  
 
99. The representative of the United States  recalled that CTE Members had agreed to suspend 
discussion of Item 10 pending results in the General Council.  If delegations were willing to re-examine 
Item 10 to see if there were more that could be done, the US was willing to present its ideas, particularly 
with respect to arrangements with non -governmental organisations.  
          WT/CTE/M/11  
         Page 21 
 
100. Following a proposal made by the Chairma n, it was decided  to discuss this matter at the 
September meeting.  
 
Report on the results of the informal consultations  
 
101. The Chairman  reported on his informal consultations as had been agreed in the May stocktaking.  
He said that  a number of consultations had been convened with delegations on several Items in order to 
help advance work.  On Items 1 and 5, he had held an informal consultation with those delegations 
which had submitted written proposals, as well as Canada because of  the effort this delegation had made 
in summarizing the common points of the different proposals in a single chart.  The possibility was 
explored of consolidating the proposals, with a view to simplifying an analysis of their similarities and 
differences.  It was decided instead to focus on preparing a list of the issues which had been covered in 
the proposals.  This list would facilitate discussion and advance the CTE's work as a first step and taking 
into account that there were positions adopted by other  delegations which were not reflected or fully 
reflected by the written proposals.  The list had been prepared and distributed at an informal consultation 
held on 22 July 1996.  Copies were available from the Secretariat.  Considering the proposals which h ad 
recently been submitted, he intended to continue informal consultations on this Item.  
 
102. Under Item 3(b), he had encouraged Canada and the United States, which had submitted written 
proposals related to eco -labelling programmes,  to examine the possibility of consolidating their proposals. 
This had not proven to be possible.  Canada had then submitted a draft Decision on eco -labelling 
programmes and the EC had submitted a proposal.  These recent submissions would have to be 
consid ered in further consultations on this issue.  On Item 4, the Chairman had been in contact with the 
ITC and UNCTAD to gather information on their existing databases on trade -related environmental 
measures.  He had also consulted with Hong Kong which had sub mitted a proposal on this Item.  On 
Item 6, he had decided to organize informal consultations once all the written proposals intended for this 
meeting had been received.  In order to better understand the issues involved related to Item 7, he had 
convened an informal consultation with Nigeria, Egypt and the United States to discuss the matter in 
depth.  This discussion had furthered an understanding of each of these delegations' positions.  It was 
his intention to continue the dialogue in this area with a v iew to advancing work.  On Items 8 and 9, he 
had met with various delegations to take stock of their opinions.   
 
103. On 22 July, the Chairman had convened an informal meeting of 22 delegations at which 
suggestions had been made concerning how work should proceed in preparation of the Report.  These 
suggestions had ranged from proposals to focus the discussion on a few is sues in small groups to proposals 
for discussion to cover all issues in meetings open to all delegations wishing to participate.  These 
differing suggestions reflected the complex nature of the issues, the differing positions with respect to 
certain elemen ts of the CTE agenda, and differing views on whether to progress concurrently on all Items 
or on specific issues for which results could be achieved at the Singapore Ministerial Conference.  As a 
result, it had been difficult to forge a consensus as to how  to proceed.  He reiterated that, as agreed at 
the May stocktaking, the Secretariat would circulate a draft of the introduction and Sections I and II of 
the Report on 31 July 1996, with the understanding that the final Report as a whole, including Section III, 
would be taken up once substantive work had been concluded.  In view of the diverging views as to how 
to progress, the Chairman intended to analyse the situation with respect to each Item of the work 
programme and consult with delegations individually  before convening another informal consultation in 
which any interested delegation could participate.   
 
104. The representatives of the European Communities  and Japan  supported the Chairman and felt 
it was important to further a comm on understanding of the issues based on discussion to date in order to 
ensure concrete results were achieved at the Ministerial Conference.   
 
105. The representative of Brazil  expressed his delegation's willingness to contribute to t he consultative 
process which would permit a consensus to adopt the Report at the October meeting.  Brazil suggested 
that informal consultations be intensified as the October meeting approached.  The representative of the 
European Communities  said that the  initial focus of these consultations should be on some of the issues WT/C TE/M/11  
Page 22 
 
which had been the subject of lengthy discussions, although not to the exclusion of other issues.  The 
representatives of Egypt  and Nigeria  agreed that informal consultations should be i ntensified, but that 
they should be balanced to deal with all Items of the work programme and that nothing should be agreed 
until everything was agreed.  The representative of India  said that the CTE's mandate was to adopt an 
integrated Report to forward t o Ministers for their consideration.    
 
106. The representative of Nigeria  said discussion to date had clarified some issues, but others 
remained unclear or controversial.  He said solutions or decisions proposed for adoption must no t be 
presented as a fait accompli , but should be based on a representative process of consensus -building.  
Nigeria felt the CTE could achieve results at the Ministerial Conference, and would support efforts to this 
end which were balanced and reflected con sensus.  Results were needed not because there was external 
political pressure to have them, but because discussion indicated they were justified to clarify current 
WTO rules or to propose new rules if necessary.  
 
107. The representat ive of Singapore, on behalf of ASEAN , said that in the haste to have results the 
CTE should not infringe on Members' rights and obligations undertaken with respect to WTO 
Agreements.  The CTE could continue its work after the Ministerial Conference.  
 
108. The representative of Mexico  asked for clarification as to when and which delegations would be 
involved in further informal consultations.  The fact that a delegation had not presented a written 
proposal on any given Item did not mean that it did not have a national position on this Item and that it 
should not be included in the process of informal consultations.  
 
109. The representatives of Cuba , Egypt , Pakistan  and Peru  supported transparent and open -ended 
informal consultations.  The representative of Australia  said that experience indicated that most decisions 
in the context of the GATT/WTO had been facilitated, at least initially, in smaller groups.   
 
110. The Chairman  recalle d an informal meeting would take place at the conclusion of this meeting 
at which Members would have an opportunity to continue the analysis of all Items of the work programme 
in order to further progress in preparing the Report.  In response to comments b y some delegations, he 
said the process of informal consultations would continue to be transparent and would take into account 
the views of any interested delegations, including those which felt that their views had not been fully 
reflected in the written proposals.  He said that he would consult initially with delegations individually in 
the near future.  He would then broaden the process of informal consultations in order to promote 
consensus and make as much progress as possible before the September meet ing. 