RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE WT/CTE/W/5
23March 1995
ORGANIZATION(95-0633)
Committee onTrade andtheEnvironment
ITEM 4:THE PROVISIONS OFTHE MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM WITH
RESPECT TOTHE TRANSPARENCY OFTRADE MEASURES USED FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PURPOSES AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES
AND REQUIREMENTS WHICH HAVE
SIGNIFICANT TRADE EFFECTS
Note bytheSecretariat
ThisNote hasbeenprepared bytheSecretariat toprovide background information forthe
Committee 'sdiscussions under Item4oftheMinisterial Work Programme.
I. REFERENCES TOPREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION
Atitsmeetings from 1992-94, theGroup onEnvironmental Measures andInternational
Trade (EMIT) discussed thesubject oftransparency regularly under thesecond point ofits
agenda: "Multilateral transparency ofnational environmental regulations likely tohavetrade
effects". Arecord ofthose discussions iscontained inTRE/3, 4,6,7,8,9,10,11,12and13.
Thefollowing documents related tothesubject oftransparency were prepared bythe
Secretariat attherequest oftheEMIT Group:
TRE/W/2 Summarises issues raised inthecourse oftheGroup 'searly
discussions onthemultilateral transparency ofnational
environmental regulations
TRE/W/4 Adescription ofenvironmental policy instruments tosupplement
information contained inTRE/W/2
TRE/W/7 Generic listing oftrade-related national environmental measures
thatmaynotbecovered adequately oratallbyGATT
transparency provisions
TRE/W/10/Rev.1 Notification requirements thatexistinmultilateral environmental
agreements
TRE/W/13 Outline analysis ofthetrade effects ofvarious environmental
measures
Inaddition, TBT/W/156 andSCTE/W/1 contain compilations ofnotifications made under
theprovisions oftheAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade (TBT) where theobjective or
rationale ofthemeasure notified wasgiven astheprotection oftheenvironment.WT/CTE/W/5
Page2
II. POINTS OFBROAD AGREEMENT REACHED INTHE EMIT GROUP
Noattempt wasmade bytheEMIT Group todraw definitive conclusions onitswork, but
itwasfeltthatacommon understanding wasemerging onseveral points related totransparency.
These were reflected inthereport bytheChairman oftheEMIT Group made onhisown
responsibility totheGATT CONTRACTING PARTIES Session inFebruary 1994 (L/7402).
(a) Although transparency isnotviewed asanendinitself, itisregarded asan
important means tobuild confidence inandprovide security andstability tothemultilateral
trading system, tohelpminimize trade restriction anddistortion, toassist private sector operators
toadjust tochanging trade policies, andtoprevent misunderstandings andultimately trade
disputes from arising.
IntheCommittee 'sowndiscussions of"theissue ofexports ofdomestically prohibited
goods" theimportance oftransparency hasbeenhighlighted foranadditional reason: toassist
importers, particularly indeveloping countries, tomake informed decisions about whether to
import particular products thatmayposeadanger tohuman, animal orplant lifeorhealth orthe
environment.
(b)Transparency requirements intheareaofenvironmental measures should notbemore
onerous thanthose inother areas ofpolicy-making thataffect trade. Norisitusual inGATT to
establish transparency mechanisms based onthepurpose ofameasure asopposed toitsnature.
(c)Duplication oftransparency requirements istobeavoided, bothwithin theWTO and
between itandother multilateral transparency mechanisms operating inthefieldoftrade and
environment.
(d)Transparency needs tobeascomprehensive aspossible butwithout imposing an
unmanageable administrative burden onindividual governments; thatcould cause compliance
problems. Higher orders oftransparency (such asnotification requirements) should notbeover-
extended.
(e)GATT transparency provisions, especially nowtheyhavebeensupplemented bynew
WTO provisions ontransparency aswellastheTPRMechanism, create abroad basis forensuring
transparency andgoalongwaytowards satisfying theneedformultilateral transparency of
national environmental measures likely tohavesignificant trade effects. There isnoperceived
needforacompletely newtransparency mechanism inthisarea, butrather adesire tobuild on
andelaborate where necessary existing mechanisms.
(f)Expostpublication andnotification istheGATT norm. When properly complied with
itcangoalongwaytowards meeting theobjectives oftransparency, particularly inthecaseof
market-based instruments which bytheirnature tendtobemore transparent thanquantitative
measures orregulations. Nevertheless, substantial benefits arefelttoderive from exante
notification ofmeasures under theTBTAgreement, particularly inmaking foreign suppliers aware
ofmeasures inplace orinpreparation, allowing them toprovide input atthestage ofdevelopment
ofnewregulations andstandards, andallowing them toadapt promptly toregulatory changes so
asnottojeopardise continued access tomarkets.
(g)Theuseofenquiry points intheTBTAgreement toactasacentral point ofcontact
fortheprovision ofinformation onmeasures inplace isvaluable andfelttoprovide abroad basis
forensuring multilateral transparency.WT/CTE/W/5
Page3
(h)Effective compliance withtheGATT/WTO transparency provisions isanessential
aspect ofsecuring transparency inpractice. TheTPRMechanism isexpected toassist indrawing
attention toareas where compliance could befurther improved.
III. AREAS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION
Work intheEMIT Group ledtoanumber ofconcerns being raised about theadequacy of
GATT and(atthattimeprospective) Uruguay Round transparency mechanisms incovering
environment-related trade measures andtrade-related environmental measures thatcancause
significant trade effects. Theconcerns arose withrespect tothree broad issues:
(a)Doanyofthemeasures inquestion escape thetransparency mechanisms altogether,
either because theyarenotsubject tosubstantive GATT/WTO disciplines orbecause those
disciplines arenotlinked adequately totransparency requirements?
(b)Totheextent themeasures arecaptured byexisting transparency mechanisms, should
theybesubject tohigher levels ordifferent forms oftransparency requirements?
(c)Iscompliance withGATT/WTO transparency requirements satisfactory andsufficient
toensure transparency isachieved defacto?
Thefollowing isasummary oftheEMIT Group 'sdiscussions, organised around those
three issues:
A. What isthereach ofthebasic GATT/WTO transparency mechanisms withrespect to
environment-related trade measures andtrade-related environmental measures that
cancause significant trade effects?
Themain transparency provisions applying under theGATT were summarized in
TRE/W/2, andanindication wasgiven there alsoofhownewtransparency provisions emanating
from theUruguay Round negotiations could leadtoimprovements inthisarea.
IntheEMIT Group 'sdiscussions, itwasgenerally feltthatthescope ofGATT Article X
isverywide, andintheviewofsome delegations comprehensive insecuring transparency atthe
levelofpublication ofallmeasures applied byWTO Members thatcanhaveasignificant effect on
trade. Certain doubts were expressed, however, about whether 00itextended publication
obligations effectively tomeasures applied byregional andlocalgovernments andauthorities.
Also, itwasnoted thatArticle Xdoesnotcover voluntary measures administered bytheprivate
sector, suchasvoluntary programmes foreco-labelling, packaging, orwaste handling.
Thescope ofthe1979 Understanding Regarding Notification, Consultation, Dispute
Settlement andSurveillance (which hasbeencarried forward intheUruguay Round Decision on
Notification Procedures) wasalsofelttobewide, butdoubts were expressed about whether it
extended tocover measures which arenottrade measures inthemore traditional sense ofthe
term, particularly domestic taxes andcharges subject toArticle III.
TheUruguay Round Decision onNotification Procedures wasexpected tomake a
significant improvement totransparency. However, there wassome discussion ofwhatiscovered
bythe"Indicative ListofNotifiable Measures" annexed toit,andparticularly thelastitemonthat
list:"Any other measure covered bytheMultilateral Trade Agreements inAnnex 1AtotheWTOWT/CTE/W/5
Page4
Agreement". Onedelegation understood thisprovision torepresent "aplace-marker", inserted at
atimewhen thefinalstructure oftheUruguay Round package wasstillunclear, andnottohave
beenintended tooblige WTO Members tonotify everything covered byaGATT/WTO discipline
intheareaoftrade ingoods.
TheTBTAgreement wasconsidered amodel ofahighleveltransparency mechanism,
withprovisions forexantenotification ofmeasures, opportunities forforeign suppliers to
comment onandinfluence thedrafting oftechnical regulations andstandards thatmight
significantly affect theirtrade, andtheestablishment ofenquiry points. Concerns expressed in
thisregard related nottothetransparency mechanism assuchbuttothecoverage ofthe
substantive disciplines oftheAgreement, andwhether certain environmental regulations, suchas
packaging andwaste handling requirements, were covered.
B. What leveloftransparency should besought forindividual environment-related trade
measures ortrade-related environment measures thatcancause significant trade
effects?
Although there wasageneral feeling thattransparency requirements inthisareashould not
bemore onerous thanthose inother areas ofpolicy-making affecting trade, there wasextensive
discussion intheEMIT Group ofwhether existing levels oftransparency were sufficient (notably
formeasures covered onlybyanobligation topublish) orwhether adifferent form orhigher level
oftransparency should besought, forexample through enquiry points ornotification obligations,
andifsoforwhich measures.
Oneissue discussed wastherelative merits ofexantenotification requirements. Some
delegations feltthattheGATT/WTO norm ofexpostnotification could belessthanadequate with
respect tocertain environmental measures thatcancause significant trade effects andthatinsuch
cases exantenotification obligations would bedesirable --product-specific subsidies for
environmental purposes, prohibitions orrestrictions onimports orondomestic saleoruse,and(to
theextent theyarenotconsidered tofallunder thedisciplines oftheTBTAgreement) technical
regulations andstandards related toproduct handling, waste management anddisposal and
voluntary eco-labelling schemes, were mentioned inthisregard.
Many delegations feltthatrules ontransparency should becommensurate withameasure 's
trade effects; thegreater thepotential forameasure tohave"significant" trade effects, themore
transparent itshould betoacountry 'strading partners. Thiswasdescribed asoneofseveral
"filters" through which theadequacy ofexisting transparency obligations might beexamined, and
apossible indicator oftheneedtotrigger higher levels oftransparency.
Discussion extended intoareview ofthetrade effects ofdifferent kinds ofenvironmental
measures andenvironment-related trade measures onacase-by-case basis, andtheGroup began
examining thepotential trade effects ofvarious types ofmeasures withanemphasis onthose
which itwasfeltwere notalready subject toahighleveloftransparency under existing GATT
provisions. Oneofthedifficulties encountered inthisregard wasthatthecontext inwhich a
measure isapplied canoften affect considerably thesignificance ofitstrade effects, anditcanbe
hardthentogeneralize about theeffects ofindividual measures. Thiswasnoted andelaborated
oninTRE/W/13. TheEMIT Group 'sanalysis inthisareawasnotcompleted.WT/CTE/W/5
Page5
C. Dogapsexistincurrent transparency provisions?
Onthebasis oftheEMIT Group 'sdiscussions onthescope ofGATT/WTO transparency
provisions andthedesirability ofseeking ahighleveloftransparency forenvironment-related
trade measures andtrade-related environment measures thatcancause significant trade effects, a
listofmeasures which certain delegations hadsuggested might represent "gaps" inexisting
provisions wascompiled inTRE/W/7. Thelistisreproduced asanAnnex tothisNote.
Several delegations feltthatfew,ifany,ofthemeasures onthelistreflected gapsin
practice, particularly given thebroad scope ofArticle X.However, some expressed concern
about whether certain measures onthelistwere covered atall,andifcovered whether thelevelof
transparency towhich theywere subject wasadequate. Certain measures received considerable
attention inthisregard. They arelisted below, along withasummary oftheconcerns expressed
oneachand,where appropriate, areference tospecific newtransparency provisions introduced
through theUruguay Round negotiations which mayhavehelped toaddress those concerns.
(a)Trade measures taken pursuant toMEAs
Most MEAs thatarerelevant inthiscontext contain provisions requiring theexchange of
certain information among Parties, inmany cases using thefacility oftherelevant MEA
secretariats (seeTRE/W/10/Rev.1 forasummary ofthose provisions). However, thelevelof
transparency provided forbydifferent MEAs isnotthesame. Theperiodicity prescribed forthe
publication orexchange ofinformation varies, notallMEAs contain mandatory provisions
requiring theexchange ofinformation about anytrade measures taken, some leave considerable
scope forindividual Parties tochoose howtoimplement theirobligations relating totheuseof
trade measures anddonotnecessarily require ahighleveloftransparency inthisregard (e.g.with
respect totheallocation ofimport quotas), some (those dealing withtrade inhazardous wastes or
chemicals forexample) require exantenotifications butmost relyonexposttransparency, andin
general there arenorequirements forexchange ofinformation withnon-Parties.
Some delegations considered thattrade measures taken pursuant toMEAs byWTO
Members should benotified ineachcaseunder appropriate WTO provisions. They feltthat
governments bearanindividual rather thanacollective responsibility tomeettheirGATT/WTO
transparency obligations, andthatobligations tonotify measures thatmayaffect theoperation of
WTO Agreements arenotmaterially affected bythecontext inwhich suchmeasures aretaken.
While notnecessarily disputing thatconclusion, some other delegations voiced doubts in
thisregard. Onefactor involved wasconcern toavoid unnecessary duplication ofnotifications
under MEA provisions ontheonehandandWTO provisions ontheother. Thatfactor figured
alsointheCommittee 'srecent discussions ontheissue ofexports ofdomestically prohibited
goods.
Onequestion thatarose isdomeasures subject totheTBTAgreement andtaken pursuant
toMEAs needtobenotified separately toother WTO Members? Some delegations pointed in
thisregard tothefactthattheTBTprovisions callforthenotification ofmeasures onlyif,inter
alia,theyarenotbased inwhole orinsubstantial partoninternational standards. Several others
felt,however, thatMEAs could notevidently beclassified as"international standards" under the
definitions usedintheTBTAgreement, andthatinthelightoftheimportance ofthese measures,
forexample inthetreatment ofnon-Parties toMEAs, theyshould benotified.
Aconcern wasraised thatrequiring notification under WTO provisions oftrade measures
taken pursuant toMEAs could provoke problems ofconflicting international law. However,WT/CTE/W/5
Page6
several delegations doubted thatthisconcern wassubstantive andsaiditwasdifficult toimagine
conflicts arising inpractice, anymore thantheywould inthecontext ofnotification through the
WTO oftrade measures taken pursuant toeconomic integration orcooperation agreements.
Onesuggestion made wastoseekgreater transparency bysetting upformal arrangements
fortheexchange ofinformation between theMEA andWTO secretariats. However, doubts were
expressed about theeffectiveness ofsucharrangements given theperceived inadequacy ofthe
information provided toMEA secretariats under theprovisions ofcertain MEAs.
Another suggestion wastoestablish aGATT/WTO registry ofprovisions inMEAs
relating totheimposition oftrade measures. However, thevalue ofsuchamechanism was
questioned given thatthetrade effects ofanysuchmeasures would notbefeltuntilanMEA Party
adopted national implementing legislation andapplied themeasures.
(b) Article XXmeasures
Certain views were expressed intheEMIT Group thatArticle XXmight exempt measures
taken under itsprovisions from GATT transparency requirements, butthegeneral opinion among
delegations wasthatitdidnotandthatmeasures taken under theprovisions ofArticle XXwere
subject toatleastthepublication requirements ofArticle X.Some feltthatthe1979
Understanding would alsoapply.
(c) Subsidies
Certain doubts were expressed intheEMIT Group about theextent towhich adequate
notification ofenvironmental subsidies thatcould cause significant trade effects wasprovided for
under GATT Article XVI:1 ortheTokyo Round Agreement onSubsidies andCountervailing
Measures.
Article 25oftheWTO Agreement onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures obliges
Members tomeetprecise notification requirements withregard toallsubsidies. Thecontent of
thenotification must specify theform ofthesubsidy, itspolicy objective and/or purpose, its
duration, itsamount perunitortheannual amount budgeted forthesubsidy, andstatistical data
permitting anassessment ofthesubsidy 'strade effects. Certain environmental subsidies are
subject tospecial notification obligations. Under Article 8.3oftheAgreement, Members are
required togivenotice inadvance ofimplementation ofsubsidies adopted "topromote adaptation
ofexisting facilities tonewenvironmental requirements imposed bylawand/or regulations which
result ingreater constraints andfinancial burden onfirms".
Under Article 18.3oftheWTO Agreement onAgriculture, payments under environmental
programmes totheagriculture sector forwhich exemption from thecommitments onthereduction
ofdomestic support isclaimed must benotified.
(d) Economic instruments
Some delegations questioned theextent towhich economic instruments, andinparticular
environmental taxes andcharges suchaspollution taxes anddeposit refund systems, were covered
byArticle Xandbythe1979 Understanding. Also, itwasnoted thatanotification mechanism
didexistforcertain taxes thatwere subject toborder taxadjustment, butthatthemechanism had
rarely beenused. Given theincreasing importance oftheuseofeconomic instruments toaddress
environmental problems, andthepotential forsuchmeasures tocause significant trade effects,WT/CTE/W/5
Page7
several delegations feltthatarelatively highleveloftransparency waswarranted inthisareaand
thattheneedfornewnotification requirements should bediscussed.
(e) Measures taken bylocalauthorities
Onequestion raised intheEMIT Group wastowhatextent afederal stateisresponsible
forensuring theproper implementation ofGATT transparency provisions formeasures applied by
itsregional andlocalbodies.
With regard totechnical regulations andstandards applied atthelevelofstateorlocal
authorities, theWTO TBTAgreement states inArticles 3.2and7.2that"local government onthe
leveldirectly below thatofthecentral government" must notify prepared, proposed oradopted
technical regulations andconformity assessment procedures whose technical content isnotthe
same asthatofregulations andprocedures previously notified bycentral governments, andin
Article 4.1thatMembers shalltakesuchreasonable measures asareavailable tothem toensure
theirlocalgovernment standardizing bodies accept andcomply withtheCode ofGood Practice for
thePreparation, Adoption andApplication ofStandards annexed totheAgreement, which includes
publication andnotification obligations.
(f)Environmental measures intheareaofservices
AtthetimeoftheEMIT Group 'sdiscussions, notransparency mechanism for
environmental measures intheareaofservices existed andsome delegations feltitimportant to
ensure thatonewasinstalled intheGeneral Agreement onTrade inServices.
Publication andnotification requirements which apply, interalia,toenvironmental
measures thataffect trade inservices havebeenincluded inArticle IIIoftheGeneral Agreement
onTrade inServices. Thiscontains alsoarequirement topublish international agreements
pertaining tooraffecting trade inservices towhich WTO Members aresignatories, andto
establish enquiry points within twoyears oftheentry intoforce oftheGATS.
(g) Packaging regulations andwaste handling requirements
Several delegations expressed doubts about whether packaging regulations orrequirements
fortherecovery, re-use, re-cycling anddisposal ofwaste were covered bytheTBTAgreement
(including theWTO Agreement) oranyother GATT/WTO disciplines, andwhether therefore
there were anyoperative transparency provisions applicable tothem. These measures were
viewed ashaving thepotential tocause significant restrictions toeffective market access. Itwas
feltbymany thattheyshould besubject toarelatively highleveloftransparency, including those
applied atthelocalgovernment levelandasvoluntary measures bytheprivate sector. Some
delegations suggested mandatory measures inthisareashould besubject tonotification
requirements, andthatenquiry points might beusedtoprovide information onvoluntary schemes.
(h) Eco-labelling
There appears tobegeneral agreement thatmandatory eco-labelling schemes aresubject to
notification under theprovisions oftheTBTAgreement. Thedefinitions contained inthe
Agreement andthe1992 Decision taken bytheTokyo Round TBTCommittee onlabelling
(TBT/M/43) arefelttomake thatclear. Given theimportance attached toensuring foreign
suppliers haveinformation about andareabletoprovide input toeco-labelling programmes atthe
design anddevelopment stage, before suchprogrammes areimplemented, theexantenotification
obligations oftheTBTAgreement areconsidered tobeparticularly valuable.WT/CTE/W/5
Page8
Concern wasexpressed about thetransparency ofvoluntary, private sector eco-labelling
schemes. TheCode ofGood Practice forthePreparation, Adoption andApplication ofStandards
annexed totheWTO TBTAgreement hasextended obligations ofpublication andnotification to
include standardization bodies (including private sector bodies). TheCode would appear toextend
transparency obligations intheareaofvoluntary eco-labelling schemes totheextent thatsuch
schemes areimplemented bybodies falling under theCode'sdefinition ofastandardizing body
andthatthebodies inquestion haveaccepted theCode. Each standardization body which has
accepted theCode isrequired tonotify thename ofthepublication inwhich itswork programme
appears, indicating standards itispreparing andthose adopted inapreceding period.
Some delegations suggested theestablishment ofspecial enquiry points might prove of
particular value inincreasing thetransparency ofvoluntary eco-labelling programmes.
Questions were raised about how, ifatall,GATT andTBTdisciplines apply toeco-
labelling schemes based onproduct life-cycle analysis thatfeature unincorporated process and
production methods (PPMs notrelated tothecharacteristics oftheproduct), anddoubts were
therefore expressed about whether adequate transparency ofsuchschemes isprovided for.
(i) PPM-based measures
Theissue ofenvironmental measures thatarebased atleastinpartonPPMs notrelated to
thecharacteristics ofaproduct wasaddressed intheEMIT Group primarily from thepoint of
viewofwhether substantive GATT/WTO disciplines apply tosuchmeasures.
Some delegations feltthatwhere aPPM didnotphysically affect theenvironment ofthe
importing country there wasnojustification available under theGATT forapplying trade
restrictions interms ofaproduct 'sPPMs; thefindings ofthe(unadopted) tuna-dolphin panel
report were referred toextensively inthisregard. Consequently, these delegations feltthatno
GATT/WTO transparency provisions could apply tosuchmeasures, norwere anywarranted.
Anumber ofother delegations, while agreeing withtheabove reasoning withrespect to
thenon-conformity ofmeasures based onunincorporated PPMs withGATT/WTO provisions,
nevertheless feltthatsuchmeasures should benotified. Intheviewofsome ofthem, thebasis for
requiring thenotification ofatleastcertain suchmeasures wastobefound intheWTO TBT
Agreement, Annex I,where technical regulations covered bythenotification provisions ofthe
Agreement aredefined.
Some other delegations feltthattheissue ofdifferential trade treatment ofproducts whose
finalcharacteristics were notmodified bytheirPPMs hadyettoberesolved, andthatuntilthenit
wasnotpossible toexpand upon whattransparency provisions, ifany,might beapplicable tosuch
measures.
D. Compliance withtransparency obligations
Inadequate compliance withexisting transparency obligations wasfeltbysome delegations
tobeamatter which deserved more attention thanpossible deficiencies intransparency
mechanisms. Inthisregard adistinction wasdrawn between negligence infulfilling transparency
obligations, which itwasgenerally feltcould notbeusefully addressed inthecontext oftheEMIT
Group 'swork, anddifferences among WTO Members intheirunderstanding andinterpretation of
theirtransparency obligations.WT/CTE/W/5
Page9
With regard tothelatter, itwassuggested bysome thatWTO Members might be
surveyed bytheSecretariat through questionnaires toassess howandwhen eachofthem made the
decision tonotify trade measures forenvironmental purposes. Attitudes towards notification
under theTBTAgreement wasconsidered apossible basis upon which toconduct suchasurvey,
anditwasfelttheresults could helpclarify towhatextent there wasacommon, shared
understanding among WTO Members ofnotification obligations andidentify whyandwhere
discrepancies existed.
Onesuggestion inthisareawastoestablish aprocedure forreviewing notification and
publication practices inthecontext oftheTPRMechanism.
Another suggestion wastocreate aWTO body withaspecific mandate toexamine and
discuss notified measures intheareaoftrade andenvironment. Some feltthiswould make
transparency generally more effective. Another potential advantage, itwasfelt,wasthatwhile
some measures taken forenvironmental purposes fellclearly under thejurisdiction ofexisting
bodies intheWTO, others didnot,andinsome cases (packaging requirements wasgiven asan
example) acombination oftrade ortrade-related policy instruments might beusedtoachieve a
particular environmental objective withtheconsequent potential foroverlapping responsibility
among WTO bodies.
E. Enquiry points
Itwassuggested thatgovernments might consider establishing enquiry points (such as
those established already under theTBTAgreement) opentoallinterested parties, public and
private, toprovide general information onenvironment-related trade measures andtrade-related
environmental measures, including those notsubject toformal notification requirements under the
GATT, andonchanges innational environmental legislation. Itwasfeltthatsuchasystem might
assist, forexample, inincreasing thetransparency ofmeasures which were notcovered adequately
oratallbyexisting transparency mechanisms, suchashandling andwaste disposal schemes,
eco-taxes, voluntary product standards andprivate schemes (notably eco-labelling), localandstate
government programmes, andprocedures affecting market access which were decentralized among
many public andprivate entities.
Theother potential advantages ofenquiry points, itwassuggested, are:
- toprovide information about newtrade opportunities forenvironmentally-friendly
products inparticular markets, suchasgovernment incentives forconsumption of
certain products, public procurement regulations thatgivepreference toproducts
which fulfil voluntary environmental standards, andpromotional programmes for
ecologically sound products conducted bynon-governmental organizations;
- toprovide developing countries withinformation ontheavailability oftechnical
assistance tohelptheirproducers comply with, ortakeadvantage of,
environmental regulations andother measures; and
- toactasacomplement tospecific notification procedures, andhelpensure that
environmental measures affecting trade would notbesubject tostricter notification
disciplines thanother similar measures affecting trade sothatnotification
requirements arenotover-extended.
Onedoubt raised about thepractical aspects ofimplementing enquiry points wastheneed
toavoid raising problems ofofficial responsibility within theparticular circumstances ofeach
WTO Member, anditwassuggested thatanofficial pledge ofassistance tohelpfindinformationWT/CTE/W/5
Page10
upon request might prove equally valuable. Another wasthatitwasfeltsomewhat unusual to
require special bodies toprovide information based onthepurpose ofameasure asopposed toits
nature; forexample, isituseful todistinguish environmental taxes from taxes applied forother
purposes andsetupenquiry points specifically torespond toenquiries about them? Inthis
context, itwaspointed outthatthere wasnooperational definition intheWTO forthetimebeing
oftheterm"environment".
Case-by-case examination wasfavoured byseveral delegations asawayofstudying
further thepotential value ofestablishing enquiry points.WT/CTE/W/5
Page11
ANNEX
(From TRE/W/7)
Potential Identified Gaps inExisting Transparency Provisions
(February 1993)
1. Handling requirements
2. Other packaging requirements including bans, technical regulations thatmay
require compliance withcertain characteristics inorder forpackaging tobeputon
themarket orallowed intothecountry, andtake-back requirements
3. Labelling andeco-labelling schemes including thecriteria tobesatisfied inorder
tobegranted alabel
4. Process andproduction methods, including those emanating from product life-
cycle analyses
5. Packaging, labelling andother general environmental measures taken by
governments atthesub-federal level
6. Economic instruments orregulations
7. Deposit refund schemes
8. Domestic taxes
9. Measures related tosubsidies
10. Measures under Article XX
11. General measures taken forenvironmental protection
12. Article IIImeasures
13. Trade measures taken fortheimplementation ofmultilateral environmental
agreements
14. Regulations orstandards based substantially oninternational standards
15. Environmental measures intheareaofservices