An
Alternative Approach for Negotiations under Paragraph 31(iii)
Submission
by India
The
following communication, dated 2
June 2005, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of India.
_______________
I.
Background
1.
The Doha Ministerial Declaration (DMD) mandates Member countries to
negotiate on the reduction or, as
appropriate, elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental
goods and services with a view to enhancing the mutual supportiveness of trade
and environment. The intent inherent
in this is to bring economic benefits (promote dynamic efficiency in production
and greater access to consumption goods at lower prices), developmental
benefits (addressing basic human needs in terms of the Millennium Development
Goals) and environmental benefits (promote sustainable modes of production and
consumption), and achieve gains from trade with improvement in environmental
quality so that it leads to "win-win" situations.
2.
Following the Ministerial Mandate, identification of environmental goods
has been at the core of the negotiation process so far. A number of Member countries and groups have
made their submissions. New Zealand has
called for a pragmatic approach to the negotiations in which the Members could
"define (environmental goods) by doing". It suggested that certain reference points
would guide the identification of environmental products.[1] It also expressed a preference for adoption of
a "single consensus list" of environmental goods but stated that a
dual-list approach could also be considered in the event that agreement on one
list could not be obtained. New Zealand also
introduced the concept of a "living list" which would allow an agreed
list to be updated for technological progress.
The EC also urged a "pragmatic" and "innovative"
approach. The EC’s suggestion is to
develop guiding principles for identification of environmental goods, so as to
include goods used in pollution control and resource management and goods that
have a high environmental performance or low environmental impact.[2] It suggested that negotiations should define
categories general enough to cover all related technology for given purposes. The South Korean submission has presented an
initial list of environmental goods which has been created on the basis of
criteria viewed by South
Korea as "practical" and which
could be "broadly accepted and applied by WTO Members".[3] Some countries have also argued that the
environmental goods can include goods produced in an environmentally friendly
manner. The United States (US) attempted
to address the environmental goods negotiations in a "creative" and
"flexible" manner. It proposed
the use of two lists - Core and Complementary.
The Core List would deal with two categories: Environmental Remediation and Pollution
Prevention and Clean Technologies.[4]_ This list, as suggested by the US, would be
arrived at by consensus and definite concessions would have to be committed. The Complementary List would contain products
on which consensus could not be arrived at.