Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:17:36.484Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The Multilateralization of PTAs’ Environmental Clauses

Scenarios for the Future?

from Part II - Trade Policy and Trade-Related Concerns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2019

By
Jean-Frédéric Morin ,
Clara Brandi  and
Axel Berger
Edited by
Manfred Elsig ,
Michael Hahn  and
Gabriele Spilker
Manfred Elsig
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Michael Hahn
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Gabriele Spilker
Affiliation:
Universität Salzburg
Get access

Summary

Preferential trade agreements (PTAs) cover a much wider diversity of environmental clauses than World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. Which PTA environmental clauses could be multilateralized and included in the WTO rulebook? This chapter compares five different scenarios for the potential multilateralization of PTA environmental clauses: (1) The “routine scenario” combines the most frequent clauses, (2) the “consensual scenario” includes the clauses accepted by a high number of WTO members, (3) the “trendy scenario” includes the most popular clauses in recent times, (4) “the power-game scenario” combines the clauses that are jointly supported by the United States and the European Union, and (5) the “appropriate scenario” is a compilation of the clauses typically included in large membership agreements. This chapter compares and contrasts the implications of each scenario and identifies their common ground. Although each scenario represents an ideal type unlikely to materialize, the comparison offers insights into how the multilateral trading system could be developed to improve the integration of environmental concerns.

Keywords

WTOPTAsmultilateralizationenvironmental provisions
Type
Chapter
Information
The Shifting Landscape of Global Trade Governance
World Trade Forum
 , pp. 207 - 232
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allee, T. and Elsig, M. forthcoming. “Are the Contents of International Treaties Copied-and-Pasted? Evidence from Preferential Trade Agreements,” International Studies Quarterly.Google Scholar
Anuradha, R. V. 2011. “Environment,” In: Chauffour, J.P. and Maur, J.C.. (Eds.), Preferential Trade Agreement Policies for Development: A Handbook. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications, pp. 407–25.Google Scholar
Baghdadi, L., Martinez-Zarzoso, L., and Zitouna, H.. 2013. “Are RTA Agreements with Environmental Provisions Reducing Emissions?” Journal of International Economics 90(2): 378–90.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. 2014. Multilateralising 21st Century Regionalism. Paris: OECD Conference Center.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R., Evenett, S. J., and Low, P.. 2009. “Beyond Tariffs: Multilateralising Non-Tariff RTA Commitments,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds), Multilateralising Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 79–141.Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. and Low, P.. 2009. Multilateralising Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bastiaens, I. and Postnikov, E.. 2017. “Greening Up: The Effects of Environmental Standards in EU and US Trade Agreements,” Environmental Politics 26(5):1–23.Google Scholar
Berger, A., Brandi, C., Bruhn, D., and Chi, M.. 2017. Towards ‘Greening’ Trade? Tracking Environmental Provisions in the Preferential Trade Agreements of Emerging Markets. Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE).Google Scholar
Berger, A. and Liu, W. H.. 2017. “Can the G20 Serve as a Launchpad for a Multilateral Investment Agreement?” Paper presented at the conference Is a Multilateral Investment Treaty Needed? World Trade Institute (WTI), Bern.Google Scholar
Chaytor, B. 2009. Environmental Issues in Economic Partnership Agreements. Geneva: ICTSD.Google Scholar
Draper, P., Khumalo, X., and Tigere, F.. 2017. Ensuring Sustainability through Trade Agreements. Sustainability Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Can They Be Multilateralised? Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. Draft: Work in Progress.Google Scholar
Dür, A., Baccini, L., and Elsig, M.. 2014. “The Design of International Trade Agreements: Introducing a New Dataset,” The Review of International Organizations 9(3):353–75.Google Scholar
Gehring, M. W., Segger, M. C. C., De Andrade Correa, F., et al. 2013. Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Measures in Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs). Geneva: ICTSD.Google Scholar
George, C. 2014. “Environment and Regional Trade Agreements: Emerging Trends and Policy Drivers,” OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Hall, P. A. 1993. “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policy Making in Britain,” Comparative Politics 25(3):275–96.Google Scholar
Helble, M. 2017. “Salvaging the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Building Blocks for Regional and Multilateral Trade Opening?” ADBI Working Papers 695.Google Scholar
Herman, L. 2010. “Multilateralizing Regionalism: The Case of E-Commerce,” OECD Trade Policy Papers 99, Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmbjx6gw69x-en.Google Scholar
Hoekman, B. and Winters, L.A.. 2009. “Multilateralizing ‘Deep Regional Integration’: A Developing Country Perspective,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds.), Multilateralizing Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 636–79.Google Scholar
Hollway, J., Morin, J.-F., and Pauwelyn, J.. 2018. Endogenous Legal Innovation in the Global Trade Governance Complex. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Horn, H., Mavroidis, P. C., and Sapir, A.. 2010. “Beyond the WTO? An Anatomy of EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements,” The World Economy 33(11):1565–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jetschke, A. and Lenz, T.. 2013. “Does Regionalism Diffuse? A New Research Agenda for the Study of Regional Organizations,” Journal of European Public Policy 20(4):626–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koremenos, B, Lipson, C., and Snidal, D.. 2001. “The Rational Design of International Institutions,” International Organization 55(4):761–99.Google Scholar
Kotschwar, B. 2009. “Mapping Investment Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: Towards an International Investment Regime?” In: Estevadeordal, A., Suominen, K. and Teh, R. (Eds.), Regional Rules in the Global Trading System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 365–417.Google Scholar
Lejárraga, I. 2014. “Deep Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements: How Multilateral-friendly? An Overview of OECD Findings,” OECD Trade Policy Papers 168, Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jxvgfn4bjf0-en.Google Scholar
Martínez-Zarzoso, I. and Oueslati, W.. 2016. “Are Deep and Comprehensive Regional Trade Agreements Helping to Reduce Air Pollution?” CEGE Discussion Papers.Google Scholar
Miroudot, S., Sauvage, J., and Sudreau, M.. 2010. “Multilateralising Regionalism: How Preferential Are Services Commitments in Regional Trade Agreements?” OECD Trade Policy Working Papers 106.Google Scholar
Monteiro, J. A. 2016. Typology of Environment-Related Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements. Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. 2009. “Multilateralizing TRIPs-Plus Agreements: Is the US Strategy a Failure?” The Journal of World Intellectual Property 12(3):175–97.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Bialais, C.. 2018. “Strengthening Multilateral Environmental Governance Through Bilateral Trade Deals.” CIGI Policy Brief 123.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Bluemer, D., Brandi, C. and Berger, A.. 2019. “Kick-starting diffusion: Explaining the varying frequency of PTA’s environmental clauses by their initial conditions.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Dür, A., and Lechner, L.. 2018. “Mapping the Trade and Environment Nexus: Insights from a New Dataset,” Global Environmental Politics 18(1):122–39.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gagné, G.. 2007. “What Can Best Explain the Prevalence of Bilateralism in the Investment Regime?” International Journal of Political Economy 36(1):53–74.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gauquelin, M.. 2016. “Trade Agreements as Vectors for the Nagoya Protocol’s Implementation,” CIGI Paper 115.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Gauthier-Nadeau, R.. 2017. “Environmental Gems in Trade Agreements: Little Known Clauses for Progressive Trade Agreements,” CIGI Paper.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Jinnah, S.. 2018. “The Untapped Potential of Preferential Trade Agreements for Climate Governance,” Environmental Politics 27(3):541–65.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Michaud, N., and Bialais, C.. 2016. “Trade Negotiations and Climate Governance: The EU As a Pioneer, but Not (yet) a Leader,” IDDRI Issue Brief 10:16.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F., Pauwelyn, J., and Hollway, J.. 2017. “The Trade Regime as a Complex Adaptive System: Exploration and Exploitation of Environmental Norms in Trade Agreements,” Journal of International Economic Law 20(2):365–90.Google Scholar
Morin, J.-F. and Rochette, M.. 2017. “Transatlantic Convergence of PTA’s Environmental Clauses,” Business and Politics 19(4):621–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. 2007. Joint Working Party on Trade and Environment: Regional Trade Agreements and Environment, COM/ENV/TD(2006)47/FINAL.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2009. “Legal Avenues to “Multilateralizing Regionalism: Beyond Article XXIV1,” In: Baldwin, R. and Low, P. (Eds.), Multilateralizing Regionalism: Challenges for the Global Trading System 6. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 368–99.Google Scholar
Pauwelyn, J. 2014. “At the Edge of Chaos? Foreign Investment Law As a Complex Adaptive System, How It Emerged and How It Can Be Reformed,” ICSID Review 29(2):372–418.Google Scholar
Schill, S. W. 2009. The Multilateralization of International Investment Law, 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Notten, P., Rotmans, J., Van Asselt, M., and Rothman, D.. 2003. “An Updated Scenario Typology,” Futures 35(5):423–43.Google Scholar
WTO. 2011. World Trade Report 2011. The WTO and Preferential Trade Agreements: From Co-existence. Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×