Trade and Environment in WTO 2010

贸易自由化与环境保护的平衡－－世界贸易组织框架下的环境保护机制探析'在传统贸易体制之下，保护潮流和贸易自由化潮流的发生与曾经是平行的，互相独立的。

随着的发展，环境退化问题日益得到人们的重视，环境问题从国内问题转变为一个全球性的问题。

贸易与环境保护之间的关系，开始得到人们的重视。

作为全球性的贸易－－世界贸易组织（WTO），必然会对这一趋势作出反映和平衡。

一、关于贸易自由化与环境保护的争议全球环境保护的浪潮表现为各种多边环境公约的相继诞生，《里约宣言》是其中的一个标志性的公约。

《里约宣言》问世后，全球刮起了“可持续发展”风。

多边环境公约的目的在于保护环境，其中必然有一些公约涉及到因环境保护措施的实施而限制了国际贸易自由发展的问题。

这类多边环境公约一般被称为与贸易有关的多边环境协议，其共同特点是对国际贸易中不利于环境的因素加以限制。

1993年关税与贸易总协定（GATT）乌拉圭回合谈判的完成和世界贸易组织（WTO）的建立，标志着国际贸易的自由化和全球化达到一个新的高度。

WTO的宗旨在于促进全球贸易自由化，减少各种关税及非关税壁垒，其中包括因各种环境保护措施而形成的贸易壁垒（绿色壁垒），因此，与贸易有关的多边环境协议同WTO在保护对象和公约宗旨上存在着差异。

对于WTO体制下是否应当承认一定限度内的或一定标准下的环境保护措施的存在，自由贸易主义者与环境保护主义者的争论和观点的分歧主要表现在以下两点：（一）竞争压力是否会使环境标准退化有关环境和贸易的争论都来源于一个简单的事实，即各国拥有不同的环境政策。

各国根据自己本国的具体条件制定不同的环境政策，而不同的环境政策会导致贸易争端的产生。

拥有严格的法律并严格执行的“高水平”国家（通常为发达国家），与拥有同样严格的法律但并不严格执行以及拥有的法律不严格或者根本就没有环境法律的“低水平”国家（通常为发展中国家）就极易发生争端。

关于上述观点，环保主义者和自由贸易主义者都表示认同，两者的分歧在于竞争压力是否会使环境标准退化，是否应当跨国家采纳相同的环境标准。

wto组织的英文作文(中英文实用版)The World Trade Organization,WTO, serves as a crucial institution in the realm of international trade, fostering an environment that promotes economic growth and cooperation among member states.With its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, the WTO operates under the principles of transparency, non-discrimination, and rule-based systems.世界贸易组织（WTO）在国际贸易领域发挥着至关重要的作用，它为成员国之间的经济成长与合作创造了有利环境。

总部位于瑞士日内瓦的世贸组织，遵循透明度、非歧视和基于规则的原则运作。

Established in 1995, the WTO replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and currently encompasses 164 member countries, accounting for over 98% of global trade.Its primary objectives include ensuring the smooth flow of goods and services, protecting intellectual property rights, and resolving trade disputes.成立于1995年的世贸组织取代了关税及贸易总协定（GATT），目前拥有164个成员国，涵盖全球98%以上的贸易。

Trade and Environment:Eco-labellingThis is one of a series of position papers on trade and environment. BirdLife International is focusing on key environmental issues that are significant to the 5th Ministerial Session of the WTO in Cancún, Mexico, September 2003. We believe that mutually reinforcing and supportive multilateral systems for international trade and environmental protection are essential to sustainable development and well-being. Without positive outcomes for both the environment and developing countries, the so-called ‘Doha Development Round’ of the WTO will fail to meet both its own sustainable development mandate and the needs of present and future generations.Summary position:BirdLife International believes that the Doha Round must deliver a multilateral trade system that reflects the concerns of civil society and works for the common good - people and the environment. It must support poverty eradication and have sustainable development at its heart.To ensure this, BirdLife International believes that:•Eco-labelling schemes are important environmental policy instruments designed to help change market behaviour and should be endorsed as significant tools for achieving sustainable development,particularly sustainable production and consumption.•The compatibility of eco-labelling schemes with WTO rules is unclear. Whilst we acknowledge the significance of labelling and eco-labelling to the WTO, we DO NOT believe that the WTO has the core competencies to negotiate this alone. It would be more appropriate for discussion to take place within the United Nations system, for example, where broader participation and sound environmentalcompetencies could be engaged.•Trade decisions, including those affecting labelling, should be guided by full and effective use of the internationally agreed Rio Principles, including the polluter pays, precaution, common but differentiated responsibility, and the ecosystem approach; noting that the precautionary and ecosystem approaches are enshrined within the legally-binding Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).•To ensure ‘the protection of human, animal or plant life or health, [and] of the environment’1 trade rules should particularly allow for the use of the precautionary principle in labelling schemes.•Labelling schemes differ in purpose, scope and design and labelling per se should not be regarded as impacting negatively on WTO trade rules, notably as an unfair barrier to trade. The use of eco-labelling schemes as valuable contributions to sustainable development should be respected by the WTO.•Measures must be taken to ensure labelling schemes do not act as unfair barriers to trade for developing and least developed countries. To this end, both mandatory and voluntary schemes should be efficient, targeted, equitable, non-discriminatory, transparent and affordable, and developed countries must ensure that technical and financial assistance is provided to developing countries to enable this.1 Doha Ministerial Declaration - paragraph 6; GATT Article XX General Exceptions.1.0 The Doha Declaration (2001) in paragraph 32 instructs the ‘Committee on Trade and Environment, in pursuing work on all items on its agenda within its current terms of reference, to give particular attention to:…… (iii) labelling requirements for environmental purposes’.It further states: ’Work on these issues should include the identification of any need to clarify relevant WTO rules. The Committee shall report to the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference, and make recommendations, where appropriate, with respect to future action, including the desirability of negotiations…’Thus, Para 32 instructs the CTE to focus on issues including eco-labelling, with a view to making recommendations where appropriate, with respect to future action, including the desirability of negotiations.2.0 BirdLife International believes that eco-labelling schemes are important tools in supporting sustainable development; they enable consumers to make informed choices and are important for awareness raising and education. We believe that consumers have the right to know about the products they purchase, including how those products are grown or manufactured, and that trade rules should not place obstacles in the way of labelling schemes that promote this.We believe that WTO rules should support and not hinder national or regional efforts to enable informed environmental choice, such as through the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (1998). Article 5.8 of Aarhus states that ‘Each party shall develop mechanisms with a view to ensuring that sufficient product information is made available to the public in a manner which enables the consumer to make informed environmental choices.’2.1 We believe that trade rules should support consumer concerns over issues such as health, nutrition, food safety, new technologies, animal welfare, production practices, workers’ rights and the environment, but at the same time should ensure labelling does not unfairly restrict developing countries’ access to developed country markets.2.2 Environmentally and socially responsible consumption is essential for sustainable development. The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI) recognises this in Paragraph 15 where governments call for action at all levels to ‘develop and adopt… … consumer information tools to provide information relating to sustainable production and consumption…’.2 Eco-labelling schemes are one such important tool.2.3 Labelling schemes differ in purpose, scope and design and can be classified according to a range of characteristics.3 Eco-labelling4 is one important facet of labelling. Different categories may have different degrees and forms of impact on international trade, including no negative impact at all. Thus labelling per se should not be regarded as impacting negatively on WTO trade rules, notably as an unfair barrier to trade for developing countries. Eco-labelling has been shown to have positive benefits for both people and2 WSSD Plan of Implementation, available at /esa/sustdev/documents/WSSD_POI_PD/English/POIToc.htm3 Label classification includes criteria such as: (i) whether a program relies on first-party or third-party verification. Within this, third-party programmes can be classed according to verification body (governmental or non-governmental), and legal status (mandatory or voluntary); (ii) whether a label is positive, negative, or neutral (where positive indicate that a product possesses certain preferable attributes, neutral summarises environmental information about the products, and negative labelling warns consumers about harmful or hazardous ingredients); and (iii) the review mechanisms for criteria, geographic scope and whether the scheme uses criteria based on non-product related process and production methods.Labels have been classified into four basic types, three defined by the International Standards Organisation (ISO):ISO Type I: Labels compare products with others within the same category, awarding labels to those that are environmentally preferable through their whole lifecycle. The label is issued and endorsed by an independent third party, such as an environmental group, a private body set up to run the label, or a government department (e.g. EU Eco-label and the German Blue Angel).ISO Type II: This is self-declared product claim made by manufacturers, importers or distributors (e.g. 100% organic). The ISO 14021 standard defines the basis of a claim, to ensure it is truthful and does not mislead.ISO Type III: Labels list a menu of a product’s environmental impacts throughout its life cycle without judging or ranking products. Information categories are set by independent bodies or industrial sector.Product specific - single issue labels: Some labels have been developed that cover specific groups of products, such as agriculture (organic labels), wood products (the Forest Stewardship Council - FSC) and fish (the Marine Stewardship Council - MSC).4 ‘Eco-labelling’ is generally recognised as a voluntary method of environmental performance certification, according to ISO Type I.environment. For example, in Costa Rica, Fair Trade labelling schemes provided the coffee co-operative Coocafe with the stability and extra income needed to convert to organic production. 52.4 We believe that the compatibility of eco-labelling schemes with WTO rules in unclear. Whilst we acknowledge the significance of labelling and eco-labelling to the WTO, we DO NOT believe that the WTO alone has the core competencies to negotiate this. Consideration could be given to discussion within, for example, the United Nations system where broader participation and sound environmental competencies can be engaged. Any negotiations regarding multilateral guidelines on procedures for the development of eco-labels that would apply to national and/or international standards should be carried out in an open and participatory way with environmental expertise and appropriate assistance for developing countries.If further negotiations are recommended by the CTE, we believe:3.0 Any decision making within the WTO on eco-labelling, whether within the CTE, Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) or Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Committees, should be transparent, participatory and have sustainable development at its heart. It should be based on thorough research and investigation considering the plethora of different labelling schemes, including case studies. This should include opportunity for open dialogue with recognised non-governmental and governmental stakeholders from outside the WTO invited to share with WTO Committee members their experiences on labelling and certification programmes. Above all, decisions should be balanced, taking into account the economic, environmental and social benefits of labelling programmes for developing and developed countries.3.1 The scope of the TBT Agreement should be extended to permit the use of standards based on non-product related production and processing methods (PPMs) in support of sustainable development. The TBT only explicitly permits standards and regulations that relate to the physical properties of goods themselves. The current interpretation of WTO rules prohibits discrimination based on the way products are produced (non product-related PPMs), even though the ability to favour more environmentally benign production methods could be a very important tool in reducing adverse impacts on biodiversity and the environment.3.2 Governments must be able to implement precautionary policies to protect health and the environment in cases where science is felt to be incomplete. Trade rules need to conform to this principle, and we support assertions that eco-labelling schemes must be precautionary.6Both the TBT and the SPS Agreements require standards to be based on ‘sound science’ and risk assessment. As interpreted by the WTO, this potentially conflicts with use of the precautionary principle, as enshrined in the CBD, the Rio Declaration (1992) and reaffirmed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002). BirdLife International believes that the precautionary principle is an important part of risk assessment and informed decision-making, taking into account the complexities and uncertainties of the modern world and ensuring ‘safety first’. As such, there should be no conflict between ‘sound science’ and using the precautionary principle.4.0 It is extremely important to ensure that labelling schemes do not unfairly restrict developing countries’ market access. To ensure health and safety and environmental protection in country of origin as well as country of export, we support and advocate the need to maximize environmental and developmental benefits through, inter alia, financial assistance, capacity-building and technical assistance to developing countries. To this end, labelling schemes must be equitable, non-discriminatory, transparent and affordable. For effectiveness, they must also be evidence-based, efficient, and targeted.5 Nick Robins and Sarah Roberts. Unlocking Trade Opportunities. IIED. 19976 Trade, Development and Protecting the Environment. DFID; The Non-Trade Impacts of Trade Policy, DGT.For further information, please contact:Joanna Phillips - Email:************************.ukAlexandra González-Calatayud - Email:***************************.ukThe Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Trade and Development Team, Environmental Policy, The Lodge, Sandy, Bedfordshire, SG19 2DL, UK; or visit: Muhtari Aminu Kano – Email:*********************.netAlberto Yanosky – Email:******************.pyBirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Girton Road, Cambridge, CB3 0NA, UK; or visit: All position papers have been written and produced by the RSPB in consultation with BirdLife International’s Secretariat (Cambridge).BirdLife International is a global Partnership of conservation organisations, working in more than 100 countries worldwide. The BirdLife Partnership strives to conserve birds, habitats and global biodiversity, joining local communities around the world to achieve awareness of our natural resources and how to use them sustainably. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is Europe’s largest wildlife conservation organisation with over a million members and the UK partner of BirdLife International. Through research, advocacy and land management, we strive to link national and international policies for sustainability with local concerns in both the South and the North.We have extensive programmes of work in many policy areas including agriculture, trade, climate change, energy, transport, the marine environment, fisheries, education and capacity building.The RSPB and BirdLife International are working to ensure that international trade and international trade rules provide a positive contribution towards achieving sustainable development and thus do not adversely affect theenvironment.Registered charity no 207076July 2003。

单元1 中英论坛讲话11-00:43It is a real pleasure to be here to open the third meeting of our forum and to be welcoming such a distinguished and influential group of people from both our countries, many of whom are now old friends. The forum aims to represent the strength of the relationship between our two countries outside the political relationship and looking round today it is clear that the relationship is very strong indeed.我很高兴地宣布我们论坛的第三次会议正式开幕,并在这里欢迎来自我们两国高层的、具有影响力的代表们。

我们中的很多人都已经是老朋友了。

论坛是为了体现我们两国这间关系的力量——在政治关系之外的力量。

环视今日会场，显然，我们的关系非常坚固。

It is a sign for me that the forum goes from strength to strength and I believe it is playing a key role in the relations between our two countries as confirmed by the Prime Minister in our call on him this morning. This year, we have taken the theme "The Challenge of Globalization" for our meetings and discussions. This theme has a particular resonance for me.这是一个迹象，表明我们的论坛越来越强大。

【专题名称】国际法学【专题号】D416【复印期号】2010年07期【原文出处】《当代法学》(长春)2010年1期第152～160页【英文标题】The Relationship between the WTO and MultilateralEnvironmental Agreements with Trade Measures【作者简介】边永民(1968-)，女，内蒙古人，法学博士，对外经济贸易大学法学院教授。

对外经贸大学法学院，北京100029【内容提要】贸易措施对保障某些多边环境条约的履行有重要作用，但是，含有贸易措施的多边环境协议与WTO之间既存在规则层面的冲突，也存在管辖权层面的冲突。

这显示国际法在协调国际环境法和国际贸易法方面有空缺。

在缺乏明确的规则指引的情况下，目前规则方面的冲突主要是通过司法机构的解释予以［中图分类号］DF961 ［文献标识码］A ［文章编号］1003-4781(2010)01-0152-9以WTO协议为代表的管制国际贸易的规则体系和多边环境条约(Muhilateral Environmental Agreements，以下简称为MEAs)有各自不同的适用领域和目的，本该在运行中互不相扰，但是，贸易和环境之间的复杂关系使这种各不相扰的状态只能维持在资源和环境容量相对于经济发展和人类需求都非常充裕的时代，而这样的时代随着越来越多的人类步入工业社会已经不幸结束了。

贸易和环境在经济上有客观的联系，生产需要环境容量①，更需要消耗自然资源。

然而，传统的经济学关于生产要素的理论中，并没有环境容量，因而造成了很多生产的外部性(Externality)。

生产对自然资源的消耗虽然大体上被生产资料要素所包括，但建立在传统经济学之上的市场通常只反映生产或者获取自然资源本身的价格，而不反映自然资源生产或者获取自然资源对环境的影响以及自然资源的消耗对生态系统的影响等，所以，从传统经济学的视角来看待自然资源并不能反映自然资源在今天的经济生产和生活中所发挥的作用。

论环境保护对WTO规则的挑战及其应对措施【英文标题】The Challenge of Environmental Protection To WTO'sRules And The Counterm easures To Be TakenCHEN Hong-lei,DU li-yun,WEI Xu-fang(College of Economics,Jinan University,Guangzhou510632,China)【作者】陈红蕾/杜立云/危旭芳【作者简介】陈红蕾(1963-)，女，安徽人，副教授，主要从事国际贸易的教学与研究。

暨南大学经济学院，广东广州510632 杜立云暨南大学经济学院，广东广州510632 危旭芳暨南大学经济学院，广东广州510632 【内容提要】随着国际经济贸易的高速发展，贸易中的环境问题日益突出，WTO 在与环境有关的贸易规则及实践运作中的缺失，正受到环境保护的严峻挑战。

本文首先具体分析了环境保护对现行世界贸易组织原则的多方位冲击，然后提出一些“绿化”WTO多边贸易规则的建议，以期发挥WTO在未来协调贸易自由化与环境保护关系中的作用。

【英文摘要】With the rapid development of international trade,the environmental prob lem in trade is outstandingday by day.WTO's defects in both trade rules an d the practices related to environment are facing severe challenge.The ess ay first analyses the diverse impact of environmental protection concretel y,and then puts forward some suggestions of "green"WTO's multilateraltrade rules,so that WTO will play an important role in coordinating trade liber alization and environmental protection.【关键词】世界贸易组织/贸易规则/环境保护WTO/trade rule/environmental problem【正文】［中图分类号］D752 ［文献标识码］A ［文章编号］1000-5072(2002)01-0001-06迄今为止，世界贸易组织尚没有关于环境保护的专门协议，其处理与贸易有关的环境问题的一般原则散见于一些条款与协议中，如《1994年关贸总协定》第20条、《农产品协议》附录二中对可免除削减义务的国内支持的规定、《技术性贸易壁垒协议》中的有关规定等。

摘要这些年来，贸易与环境问题一直是WTO中最具有争议的话题，尤其是成了发展中国家与发达国家之间发生争执与交锋的焦点，保护环境和发展贸易是促进社会和经济发展、提高人类生活水平的两个重要的方面。

环境与国际贸易的关系问题是全球人们都关注的问题之一。

本文分析了国际贸易与环境的一般关系，国际贸易与环境之间存在着紧密的关系；根据这些理论基础分析了广东的国际贸易对环境有利的影响和对环境的不利影响；针对中国加入世界贸易组织已成定局,提出作为全国最大的外贸出口省,广东应该在哪些方面采取措施,增强广东省在国际市场上的竞争力。

[关键词]国际贸易环境指标库兹涅茨曲线AbstractIn recent years, trade and environment issues on the WTO have been the most controversial topic. Especially, environment and trade issues are disputes with the focus of clashes. Protection of the environment and development are two important aspects of promoting social and developing economic.The environment relationship with international trade problem is one of the problems that global people all pay attention to. The article relates to the relation of the international trade and the environment. The article introduces that the international trade of Guangdong and the environment have close relations. Joining the World Trade Organization, China becomes the foregone conclusion. The province is proposed exports as the national biggest foreign trade, which aspects Guangdong should take measures in strengthening Guangdong Province's international market competitive ability.[Key Words] International trade; Environment target; EKC目录1导论 (4)1.1 研究背景与意义 (4)1.2文献综述 (5)1.3 写作线索与结构安排 (6)2国际贸易与环境一般关系分析 (6)2.1国际贸易对环境的影响 (6)2.2环境对国际贸易的影响 (7)3国际贸易对广东省环境的有利影响 (10)3.1国际贸易的扩大有利于提升环保水平 (10)3.2国际贸易的扩大有利于提升国民的环保意识 (10)4国际贸易对广东省环境的不利影响 (11)4.1水资源的污染 (11)4.2大气的污染 (11)4.3固体废弃物污染 (12)5相关政策建议 (13)5.1政府层面 (13)5.2企业层面 (13)小结 (14)参考文献 (15)致谢 (16)国际贸易对广东环境的影响及其对策1导论1.1 研究背景与意义环境问题是指全球环境或区域环境中出现的不利于人类生存和发展的各种现象。