Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

Member Scholars Urge U.S. Trade Representative to Protect the Environment in Trade Agreements

In the nearly 20 years since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) entered into force, the linkages between trade and environmental harm have become clearer than ever.  Trade agreements can lead to significant adverse environmental impacts, particularly when countries do not have sufficient environmental laws, policies, and institutions—and trade alone will not increase the demand for higher environmental standards.  Instead, free trade agreements (FTAs) may lead to significant increases in pollution and serious adverse impacts from certain economic sectors. 

CPR Member Scholars Carmen Gonzalez, David Hunter, John Knox, and I sent a letter today to U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk to express our concerns. We argued that when the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative drafts trade promotion authority legislation to implement the Trans Pacific Partnership and other future trade agreements, it should include strong environmental protection provisions.   We make eight recommendations for draft trade promotion authority that would ensure that free trade agreements (FTAs) improve trade-environment linkages:

  1. “Country Readiness.”  Prior to the adoption of any FTA, the USTR should evaluate the institutional and legal capacity of the prospective trading partner in the context of assessing a country’s readiness to enter into an FTA with the United States.  Any problems should be resolved prior to signing the FTA.
  2. Environmental Impact Assessment. To inform and assist with the evaluation of a country’s institutional and legal capacity, the United States should assess the potential environmental impacts of an FTA on the prospective trading partner.
  3. Post-Implementation Impact Monitoring. Once the FTA is in effect, the United States should evaluate the environmental impacts of the FTA to determine whether any adjustments should be made to (a) the FTA’s core trade obligations; (b) legislation, institutions, and institutional structures needed to implement the FTA; and (c) the type and amount of capacity building given to U.S. trading partners.
  4. Multilateral Environmental Agreements. The United States should include provisions in the TPP and future FTAs that exempt trade restrictions in multilateral environmental agreements from trade challenges.
  5. Citizen Submissions on Environmental Matters. The United States should continue including citizen submission processes in trade agreements and to ensure that a secretariat or other body has the independence to determine the scope of the factual record and a monitoring mechanism is included in the process.
  6. Transparent Dispute Settlement. The United States should make all dispute settlement in both State-to-State and investor-State disputes subject to open, public hearings in which all documents are made public.
  7. Representative Trade Advisory Committees.  The United States should provide Congress, Trade and Environmental Policy Advisory Committee, and other trade advisory committees with meaningful opportunities to contribute to the U.S. position.
  8. International Institutions.  The United States should include an independent secretariat as part of any FTA package, including a dedicated source of funding and a joint public advisory committee.  This secretariat would assist with the citizen submission process and would promote transparency in the trade-environment field.

The full letter is here.

Showing 2,819 results

Chris Wold | May 4, 2012

Member Scholars Urge U.S. Trade Representative to Protect the Environment in Trade Agreements

In the nearly 20 years since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) entered into force, the linkages between trade and environmental harm have become clearer than ever.  Trade agreements can lead to significant adverse environmental impacts, particularly when countries do not have sufficient environmental laws, policies, and institutions—and trade alone will not increase the […]

Rena Steinzor | May 3, 2012

White House Letter Focusing Debate on Regulatory Costs — and Not Benefits — Frustrated EPA Officials, Emails Reveal

By CPR President Rena Steinzor and Media Manager Ben Somberg Internal EPA emails obtained by CPR through a FOIA request reveal EPA officials’ frustration regarding the White House’s efforts to triangulate House Republicans’ ferocious attacks on regulations. A White House letter last year emphasizing regulatory costs but barely describing the lives saved and injuries avoided […]

David Hunter | May 2, 2012

Executive Order Embraces International Regulatory Race to the Bottom as Official Administration Policy

On one level, President Obama’s Executive Order issued Tuesday, “Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation,” seems benign enough.  After all, who would be against international cooperation and a desire to “reduce, eliminate or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements”?  Moreover, the Order on its face does little more than set out priorities and procedures for enhancing international […]

| May 1, 2012

Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Ratifying the Basel Convention on Transboundary Waste

a(broad) perspective Today’s post is third in a series on a recent CPR white paper, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership: Why the United States Should Ratify Ten Pending Environmental Treaties.  Each month, this series will discuss one of these ten treaties.  Previous posts are here. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes […]

Matthew Freeman | April 30, 2012

Bloomberg News Serves up an Echo-Chamber-Ready Take on Regulation

Last week, Bloomberg News ran a curious story conflating a range of issues under the banner of regulatory rollbacks. The piece keys off of the ongoing GOP push to deregulate America. That effort has been going on for decades, of course, but in the wake of the recession (made possible, not coincidentally, by deregulation in the […]

Ben Somberg | April 30, 2012

Administrative Conference of the United States Teams Up with Chamber of Commerce on Regulations

In its own words, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) is “an independent federal agency dedicated to improving the administrative process through consensus-driven applied research, providing nonpartisan expert advice and recommendations for improvement of federal agency procedures.” On Tuesday afternoon, ACUS and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are jointly sponsoring an event at […]

Rena Steinzor | April 27, 2012

The Pander Games: Obama Administration Sells Out Kids Doing Dangerous Agricultural Work, Breaks Pledge to Ensure Welfare of Youngest Workers

Yesterday evening, when press coverage had ebbed for the day, the Department of Labor issued a short, four-paragraph press release announcing it was withdrawing a rule on child labor on farms. The withdrawal came after energetic attacks by the American Farm Bureau, Republicans in Congress, Sarah Palin, and—shockingly—Al Franken (D-MN). Last year, Secretary of Labor […]

Robert L. Glicksman | April 27, 2012

A Bill to Steamroll the NEPA Process

The irony is palpable, though clearly intentional.  More than forty years ago, Congress kicked off the “environmental decade” by adopting the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  NEPA’s goals are to ensure that federal agencies whose developmental missions often incline them to ignore or place a low priority on environmental protection to consider the possible adverse […]

Rena Steinzor | April 26, 2012

BP Spill: Perp Walk for Underling Shouldn’t Satisfy Anyone

With considerable media flourish, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Tuesday the first and so far only criminal charges related to the BP Deepwater Horizon catastrophe that killed 11 workers, and did profound violence to the Gulf of Mexico and the local economies dependent up on it. One Kurt Mix, 50, an engineer involved in […]