WTO NEWS: SPEECHES DG PASCAL LAMY
26-29 March 2006
Ministerial Segment — Panel on Biodiversity and Trade
Convention on Biological Diversity
8th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(Cop-8)
SEE ALSO:
>
press releases
> WTO news archives
> Pascal
Lamy's speeches
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am grateful for the opportunity to be able to speak to you today on
the relationship between biodiversity and trade. There is no doubt in my
mind that both trade and biodiversity policies have the capacity to be
mutually reinforcing. However, for mutual reinforcement to truly take
place, policy-makers in both the trade and environment domains must
continue to search for the right balance between the two sets of policy
goals.
The Convention on Biological Diversity and the WTO stand side-by-side
today in the canvass of rules that the international community has been
weaving to make the world a more orderly place. While these rules do not
exhaust every facet of the relationship between biodiversity and trade,
it is critical that they successfully interface.
Today, more than ever before, we have become conscious of the fact that
we do not simply live on a planet, but live on what is itself a “living
planet”. There are many reasons why that planet needs to be kept alive.
First, is the wellbeing of the human race — which cannot itself thrive
in an unhealthy ecosystem. But, second, is our moral and ethical
responsibility to preserve the flora and flauna on whose habitats we
intrude as we construct our own. The preservation of our biological
diversity is a responsibility that we owe not only to this generation,
but to future generations too.
From a Darwinian perspective, extinction is the fate of species who lose
in the struggle for survival. However, today, it is widely recognized
that in addition to the process of natural extinction, human
intervention has accelerated the disappearance of valuable species —
ones that will not be replaced. It is incumbent upon us to examine our
role in the loss of biodiversity, and to do our utmost to preserve the
genetic make-up of our planet, its species diversity, and the diversity
of its ecosystems. The WTO stands ready to collaborate.
It is undoubted that completely unregulated trade can be harmful for
biodiversity. Trade opening needs to be accompanied by the appropriate
set of domestic policies — environmental and otherwise — to deliver its
promised welfare gains. However, in the management of biodiversity, I
note that trade has repeatedly proven itself to be an important tool for
environmental policy-makers. It can create value for biological
resources, giving people an incentive for conservation.
The story of the African elephant, and the experience of the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species in preserving that
elephant, says it all. While completely unmanaged trade in ivory had led
to a serious decline in the African elephant population, more managed
trade under CITES, now acts as an incentive for local communities to
protect the elephant. With managed trade, the elephant in some parts of
Africa is no longer seen as a menace — as an animal that treads over
crops and destroys agricultural land, but as a valuable resource. This
is but one example of the successful synergies we can obtain between
trade and the preservation of our finite set of biological resources.
The destruction of habitats and the extinction of species can actually
be stopped when trade becomes an instrument for conservation.
There are various sets of rules, discussions and negotiations in the WTO
that have a direct bearing on biodiversity. The ongoing negotiations on
agriculture in the Doha Round are understandably, of course, critical
from your standpoint. I know that many of our colleagues in the CBD are
following them closely. While the negotiations are seeking to expand
agricultural market access through the reduction of tariffs, they also
aim at the reduction of subsidies that distort trade. Many of these
subsidies have been destructive to the environment, encouraging a faster
pace of land conversion, a loss of forests and of biological diversity.
It is important that WTO members persevere in bringing these subsidies
down.
I wish to draw the attention of this audience to what is known as the
“Green Box” set of measures within the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.
That Green Box explicitly authorizes countries to use subsidies for
certain specific objectives, like environmental preservation. The Green
Box is also being discussed in the Doha Round, and I hope that you — the
environmental community — will continue to provide us with fresh ideas
on how it can best serve you.
Discussion in the WTO on the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement
and the Convention on Biological Diversity has been equally important
for you. It is, of course, important to recognize at the outset that the
membership of different international agreements is seldom identical. In
this case, it is not identical either.
Having said that, clearly the WTO is not a legal system that operates in
isolation — it simply cannot; and nor can the CBD. In dispute after
dispute, the Appellate Body of the WTO has confirmed that the WTO is
capable of taking other bodies of international law into account. The
objective of ongoing discussions is to ensure a harmonious co-existence
between the different legal regimes that we have created
internationally.
The issues of access to genetic resources, of prior informed consent and
of benefit sharing are all being explored in the WTO. They are also
being examined in WIPO — another important partner in the intellectual
property domain. Our members continue to be divided on how best to
address these issues, with some wanting an amendment of the TRIPS
agreement, and others saying that there is no conflict between the WTO
and the CBD warranting such a change. The discussions must still run
their course.
Whatever their outcome, it is incumbent on all countries to use
intellectual property rights in a manner that fosters biodiversity — all
countries have a responsibility. It suffices to look at rainforests —
often labelled as our “medicinal stockpile” — to know that intellectual
property rights must be used judiciously. We must reward those who
contribute to maintaining our genetic diversity and must reward
innovators, be they indigenous communities, pharmaceutical companies, or
otherwise.
In the Doha Round, the WTO is also looking at the relationship between
its rules and the specific trade obligations contained in multilateral
environmental agreements. This may provide another avenue for enshrining
a harmonious co-existence between the WTO and other legal regimes. CITES
has repeatedly been discussed in these negotiations.
Ladies and gentlemen, to conclude, allow me to say that I see no
conflict between trade and the environment. Countries, and international
institutions, must simply ensure that they pursue their various policies
coherently.
With this message, I wish you every success in your deliberations at
this Ministerial Segment of the CBD. I leave you in the good hands of my
deputy, Mr. Harsha Singh, who will be representing me.
Thank you for your attention.