WTO 是否有能力调和贸易与环境的矛盾(英文)
孙文杰
【关键词】WTO;TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT;RECONCILE
【全文】
To what extent is the World Trade Organization adequately able to reconcile trade and environmental conflicts?
1. Introduction
Since the time entering into 1990s, the international community have begun to be increasingly committed both to trade liberation, through Uruguay Round extension of the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) and the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and to environmentally sustainable development, through the agreements signed at the UN Conference on Environment and Development of 1992. In theory, trade liberalization provides states to specialize in the production of goods and service in which they are relatively most efficient so as to enable states to maximize output from a given input of resources to meet the environmental sustainability. Trade can also improve the efficiency of resource allocation and encourage the spread of environmentally friendly technology. The higher rate of growth of income resulting from trade might help to generate the resources needed for investment in environmental protection. However, these notions seems to be naïve because they are usually based on the assumption that all trading states are or try to be at the same level of environmental protection.
Indeed, under the current GATT/WTO regime, trade can harm the environment. Economists regard the pollution as an example of market failure where externalities are not internalized. It is true that there is no uniform environmental standard adopted throughout all trading states. Concerning international competitiveness, countries might not internalize the externalities on their products. Free trade of these products amounts to make the existing inefficiency of allocation of resources even more inefficient. Allowing imports from lower environmental standard countries might lead them to lower the environmental standards to attract foreign direct investment into their ‘pollution havens’. These appear like a spoon of oil poured onto a flaming fire. To this extent, international environmental agreements or national environmental policies are justified to build up restrictions on imports of certain commodities. From a legal perspective, arguments of some environmentalists are summarized as that the rules of multilateral trading system may (1) pose difficulties for the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements; (2) frustrate attempts to protect resources and environment in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as occurred in tuna-dolphin and shrimp-turtle cases; (3) prevent nations from setting higher domestic environmental standards and measures; (4) obstruct efforts to compel other countries to adopt high environmental standards, although they may be necessary to prevent or correct transboundary pollution, to remove competitive advantages in attracting investment and in selling goods or services, or to conserve natural resources. Although the trade community, the WTO, itself has established a Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE); set out some ‘green provisions’ in the agreements; and created an Appellate Body, the question that ‘Is the WTO adequately able to reconcile trade and environmental conflicts?’ can be still asked. To answer this question, I subsequently ask myself three questions: whether the WTO laws are adequate to deal with the trade-environment disputes; whether the GATT/WTO dispute settlement system have given enough concerns on environmental interests while dealing with trade disputes; whether WTO regime can work independently. I assume that if all questions can be clarified, the objective conclusion will be achieved.
