Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB

REWARDING BENEFITS THROUGH PAYMENTS AND MARKETS
This report is not the place for an extensive discussion on the future organisation of international governance
on trade and environment, but some concerns and observations can be raised:
• It is legitimate to ask whether the WTO is the best venue for an increasing amount of dispute settlement
procedures and agenda-setting on sustainability of products and production systems. Given that its
primary task is to regulate the provision of a level playing field for world trade, directing the conditions
under which products are produced might seem beyond its original intention;
• Whilst the effects of trade liberalisation on economic development have been thoroughly investigated,
this is much less true for its impacts on ecosystems and the environment (Verburg et al. 2009). Some
studies have found that liberalising trade in agricultural products could lead to large biodiversity losses
especially in Latin America and Africa yet would decrease losses in Europe and North America due to
transfers in agricultural production (ten Brink B. et al. 2007);
• Trade-offs may exist between the long and short term; between economic development and environmental
and living conditions; and between natural capital and GDP. These are especially relevant for
developing countries. Restricting trade in products by obliging certain production standards, or by
favouring certain products over others, limits the flexibility (also in time) that developing country governments
have to set their own priorities, whilst compliance can pose a significant challenge to small
and medium-sized businesses in these countries. On the other hand, short-term development by ‘mining’
natural resources could mean long-term impoverishment.
• Given the ecological footprint of many developed economies and the impacts of producing their imports
on climate change and biodiversity loss, there is a powerful argument for them to take action on at least
the aspects of production that clearly influence global commons.
• Understanding and defining terms such as ‘sustainable production’ or ‘environmentally-friendly products’
is important for ensuring trade and environment policies are mutually supportive. Finding common ground
amongst governments on criteria for key terms should be viewed as an important prerequisite before
enacting compulsory measures focused on sustainable trade. The broader the support for these criteria,
the less resistance there will be to applying them to make trade more sustainable. Another trade-off
presents itself here, as front-runner countries have to balance their desire for ambitious criteria with
building a coalition based on a minimum level of shared principles.
Sources: Sampson 2005; UNEP and IISD 2005; Verburg et al. 2009 and ten Brink B. et al. 2007
TEEB FOR NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY MAKERS - CHAPTER 5: PAGE 55