We must spare no effort to free all of humanity, and above all our children and
grandchildren, from the threat of living on a planet irredeemably spoilt by human
activities, and whose resources would no longer be sufficient for their needs
(United Nations Millennium Declaration, GA Res. 55/2).
Since the increasing pressure on ‘’ fair trade’’ emphasized by massive street
demonstrations at the 1999 Ministerial Conference in Seattle, the World Trade
Organization( WTO) has had to face new objectives raised by political, religious
and ideological interests, labor, animal and women’s right. The environmental
issue has moved beyond local and even national boundaries into the foreign
policy debate, since actions in one country have had adverse environmental
effects on another. As a consequence, public interests has intensified, in the
light of high profile trade and environmental concerns that extends into some
of these new sensitive areas such as the role of science in risk assessment, the
conservation of endangered species, the cross border movement of genetically
modified organisms( GMOs) and measures to protect public health.
Economists, lawyers and environmentalists have called for international
agreements, which abrogate national sovereignty and delegate foreign policy to
international agreements. Trade and environmental issues have come to the
forefront of foreign policy, challenging and reshaping traditional interactions
between trade and environment. Varieties of demands on the growing lists of
trade and environmental issues have driven international treaties and
agreements, which seem to have high costs with low benefits or ‘’ a chilling
effect’’ (Conca, 2000).
Due to new problems and demands, the density of international institutions
has risen in the new world order. With increasing numbers of international treaties and organizations, different international norms have become more
intrusive on each other. This proposal seeks to study’’ international law and its
relationship to trade, environment and sovereignty, with focus on Cartagena
Protocol on Biosafety’’ as a case study to ‘’evaluate a principle research
question: what are the contradictions between different approaches towards the
environment of the WTO and multilateral environmental agreement (MEAs)? The
aim of the case study is to find general contradictions between the WTO and
MEAs and to analyze the overlap issues between different sets of multilateral
agreements. [...]
Table of Contents
1. Background of the Study
2. Introduction
3. Multilateral Trading Agreements (MTAs) versus Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
4. Trade liberalization
5. Environmental Protection
6. Statement of the Problem/Research Problem
7. Significance or Justification of the Study
8. Objectives of the Study
9. Hypothesis/ Research Questions
10. Scope
11. Theoretical or Conceptual Framework
12. Methodology/ Materials and Methods
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Methodology
12.3 Methods
12.4 Research Design and Data Collection
13. Presentation of Findings
14. Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations
14.1 Summary
14.2 Conclusion
14.3 Recommendation
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This research aims to identify and analyze the structural and jurisdictional contradictions between the World Trade Organization (WTO) and Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), with a specific focus on the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, to determine how trade liberalization and environmental protection can be reconciled within global governance.
- The relationship between international trade law and environmental protection.
- The dynamics of regime complexity and potential conflicts between WTO and MEA norms.
- The impact of state sovereignty on the enforcement of international environmental standards.
- The use of the precautionary approach in trade and environmental policy making.
- The role of risk assessment in international trade and biosafety regulations.
Excerpt from the Book
Examples of classic WTO- MEA vis a vis Sovereignty Conflicts
The interaction of MEA trade measures with the multilateral trading system centered on the GATT and overseen by the WTO has remained one of the key issues of trade and environment debate, according to respondents interviewed and literature reviewed.
What constitutes a ‘’conflict’’, it is noted would be a matter of interpretation of the MEA and the various agreements under the WTO. A general conflict does not exist unless one treaty requires a particular course of action that is either prohibited in other instruments, or the latter instrument requires the opposite course of action. The incompatibility emerges where a party to both treaties cannot comply with the obligations under both treaties simultaneously (W Jenks, 1953).
The basic WTO rules require WTO members not to discriminate between other WTO members’’ like products’’, or between domestic and international production. MEA based measures could potentially run foul of these requirements where imports are treated less favorably than domestic goods in the market, particularly where enforcement measures are being taken against non-complying parties or non-parties. The exceptions to WTO requirements listed in GATT Article XX makes no reference to MEAs (since very few MEAs existed when the GATT was first written). However, the exceptions for the protection of animals, human and public health( para b), and the conservation of exhaustible natural resources( para g) may be applicable; some of these exceptions have been used in various environment related cases at the WTO, though to date none of these have involved measures taken under MEAs.
Summary of Chapters
Background of the Study: This chapter introduces the increasing pressure on trade and environment issues within the World Trade Organization and the rise of international institutions dealing with environmental concerns.
Introduction: This section details the growing density of international norms and the objective to study the relationship between international law, trade, and sovereignty using the Cartagena Protocol as a case study.
Multilateral Trading Agreements (MTAs) versus Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs): This chapter addresses the evolving conception of international regimes and the inconsistencies in the roles played by trade and environmental structures.
Trade liberalization: This section discusses the constitution of the WTO and the challenges it faces regarding its regulatory reach into non-trade areas and the call for systemic reforms.
Environmental Protection: This chapter analyzes how economic liberalization policies can negatively impact indigenous agricultural systems and promote environmental degradation while MEAs attempt to enforce stricter standards.
Statement of the Problem/Research Problem: This section identifies sovereignty as the linchpin of global governance and the main obstacle to reconciling trade and environmental regimes.
Significance or Justification of the Study: This chapter justifies the research based on the growing demands for addressing environmental issues in the context of global foreign policy and trade.
Objectives of the Study: This section outlines the specific research goals, including analyzing the recognition of "like products" and comparing risk assessment methodologies between the WTO and MEAs.
Hypothesis/ Research Questions: This chapter presents the research questions intended to guide the study, focusing on the contradictions between WTO rules and MEA provisions.
Scope: This chapter focuses on three specific issues between the WTO and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and outlines the methodological approach regarding coherence processes.
Theoretical or Conceptual Framework: This section employs regime theory, neoclassical economics, and constructivism to analyze the development and norms of trade and environmental regimes.
Methodology/ Materials and Methods: This chapter details the research design, including multiple empirical case studies and qualitative interviews with various international organizations.
Presentation of Findings: This section presents the analysis of the relationship between the WTO and the Cartagena Protocol, focusing on risk assessment and sovereignty conflicts.
Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations: This chapter concludes that the relationship between trade and environment is contentious due to differing norms and suggests enhanced information exchange between regimes.
Keywords
World Trade Organization (WTO), Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, Sovereignty, Trade Liberalization, Environmental Protection, Regime Theory, Risk Assessment, Precautionary Approach, International Law, Sustainable Development, Global Governance, Jurisprudence, Genetic Modification, Bio-products.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this dissertation?
The dissertation focuses on the complex and often contradictory relationship between the World Trade Organization (WTO) and Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), specifically looking at how these two regimes interact, their differing norms, and the implications for state sovereignty.
What are the core research areas of the work?
The core themes include the intersection of international trade law and environmental law, the impact of trade liberalization on environmental policies, the role of risk assessment and precautionary rules, and the struggle to achieve sustainable development within a system driven by competing jurisdictional mandates.
What is the central research question?
The research asks what the general contradictions are between different approaches towards the environment taken by the WTO and MEAs, and how these contradictions impact state sovereignty and the coherence of international legal systems.
What scientific methods are utilized in this study?
The study employs a qualitative, multi-method approach. It uses multiple empirical case studies, extensive literature reviews of international legal and political theories, and qualitative interviews with officials from international organizations (like the WTO and UNEP) and national governments.
Which topics are covered in the main body?
The main body examines the historical background of the WTO, the emergence of MEAs, the application of regime theory to trade/environment conflicts, and specific case analyses such as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and various WTO dispute settlements.
What are the most relevant keywords characterizing this research?
Key terms include WTO, MEAs, Cartagena Protocol, sovereignty, trade liberalization, risk assessment, precautionary approach, international regimes, and sustainable development.
How does the author define the relationship between "rules" and "norms"?
The author argues that while regimes may change their specific rules to adapt to new global conditions, these changes do not necessarily represent shifts in their fundamental norms. The WTO is normatively driven by trade liberalization, while MEAs are driven by environmental protection.
What specific role does the Cartagena Protocol play in the case study?
The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety serves as a practical, high-impact case study to examine how scientific uncertainty regarding genetically modified organisms (GMOs/LMOs) creates tensions between trade and environmental safety regulations.
Why does the author advocate for "cross-over specialists"?
The author concludes that because trade and environmental regimes are increasingly overlapping, there is an urgent need for specialists who understand both the intricacies of international trade law and the requirements of environmental science to resolve jurisdictional inconsistencies.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Professor Nicholas Sunday (Autor:in), 2012, International Law and its Relationship to Trade, Environment and Sovereingty, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/209932
