Havana Workshop on Trade, Environment and Development

ConclusionsRecommendationsPreparing for future events

Conclusions on Biodiversity-related issuesSui generis systems and protection of

traditional knowledge: Patents may not be an appropriate

instrument Effective protection requires prior informed

consent, at national and multilateral levels Art 27.3(b) of the TRIPs Agreement allows

sui generis systems for plant varieties and could be extended to traditional knowledge

Conclusions on Biodiversity-related issuesSui generis systems and protection

of traditional knowledge: National experiences with sui generis

systems show that a national biodiversity policy and a legal framework are required

Legal system at the national level is not enough: multilateral legal framework is needed

Conclusions on Biodiversity-related issuesSui generis systems and protection

of traditional knowledge: Ongoing debate in WTO and WIPO:

Developing countries have proposed that prior informed consent and material transfer agreements include certificates of origin, opposition from several developed countries

Conclusions on Biodiversity-related issuesExperiences with benefit sharing Process of learning by doingContracts on Access are already being

made, but legal framework is required to ensure fair and equitable benefit-sharing

Ownership has to be established clearly

Conclusions on MEAsRecent developments (Biosafety

Protocol, PIC Convention, PoPs) address and minimize the risks of potential conflict between MEA trade measures and WTO rules

However the issue of eco-labelling and technology transfer still need to be resolved

Conclusions on EPPs

Organic food has a niche market, but that market is growing rapidly

Food security may be taken into account by countries

Products that could be mainstreamed have to be identified

Mainstream marketing channels have to be explored

Conclusions on Market Access

There are significant effects of health and environmental requirements on market access Fisheries (India, Cuba, Rep.

Tanzania, Bangladesh) Coffee and honey (Cuba) Tea, mango pulp, peanuts (India) Textiles (Bangladesh, India, Tunisia)

Conclusions on Market Access

Effects are not uniform across sectors Fisheries: high costs of compliance Coffee, honey and peanuts: testing is

difficult and even technically impossible

Scientific justification for standards is not always clear to developing countries

Conclusions on Market Access

What to do about it? WTO challenge (dispute settlement)

is costly Standards could be challenged where

they are deemed to be protectionist or restrict trade unnecessarily

Use review processes of WTO (SPS and TBT Committees)

Prepare strong case studies (London)

Conclusions on Trade Liberalization and the Environment :Agriculture

Brazil: removal of subsidies resulted in environmental benefits, good environmental policies were put in place simultaneously

No consensus on multifunctionalityNeed to define support measures and

other measures that promote food security and development

Conclusions on TextilesBangladesh:

child labour issues used to be more important, but MoU with ILO has resolved issue of pressure for trade restrictions

With increased production of textiles, environmental impacts become more important

Conclusions on TextilesTunisia:

Environmental factors are becoming important in trade relations with European UnionEco-labelsEnvironmental management systemsInformal requirements by buyers

Industry is responding effectively

Conclusions on Technology issues

Evolution away from technology transfer to technology management and technology development concepts

What to do for SMEs?How to comercialise existing R&D in

developing countries?How to promote technology

development agreements between private investors and companies in developing countries (example: Inbio-Merck)

Conclusions on Technology issues

Incentive packages are needed nationallyHow can commitments by Governments

(MEAs, TRIPS and other WTO Agreements) be implemented?

Publicly funded research and developmentCapacity building needs for technology

transfer should be clearly identifiedCapacity building is needed to develop

projects to benefit from ToT provisions in MEAs and to adapt technologies to local conditions

Conclusions on DPGs

General problem of export of DPGs continues

Some MEAs cover some DPGs, but not consumer products

Institutional and regulatory structures at the domestic level are helpful

DPGs

Technical assistance needed for identifying DPGs and their effect on human health, trade and development

South south information sharingExport notification of DPGs

should be revived

Recommendations

Outcome of the project?Follow-up?

Terms of reference for further studiesOngoing studies by researchers

South Africa: EPPs, Biodiversity/benefit sharing

Philippines: DPGs, EPPs (organic foods), ToT

Tunisia: transfer of technologyStudies to be commissioned in

other participating countries

Publication of papers

Los Banos workshopCuba workshop

London roundtable, hosted by FIELD

AgendaDates Other Participants

UNCTAD Expert Meeting on Traditional Knowledge: 30 October to 1 November 2000

In cooperation with WIPO and CBD

Experts nominated by Governments, but once nominated participate in their personal capacity

UNCTAD Expert Meeting on Traditional Knowledge: 30 October to 1 November 2000

SystemsNational experiences

Challenges

How to add value to the work being undertaken in CBD and WIPO? Developmental aspects Trade aspects

Systems

Legal forms of protection (a) conventional IPR regimes; (b) sui generis systems; (c) national access and benefit-sharing

legislation, embodying the prior informed consent principle;

(d) contractual agreements; and (e) customary and common-law regimes

Systems

Non-legally binding forms of protection (a) voluntary guidelines; (b) codes of conduct; and (c) traditional resource rights.

National experienesNeed to prepare papers and presentations Countries participating in this project:

Brazil Costa Rica Cuba India Philippines South Africa Tanzania, Rep. of

UNEP/UNCTAD Task Force on Capacity Building in Trade, Environment and Development

Building on existing UNCTAD-UNEP co-operation (MoU, 1997)

Response to growing demand from developing countries

Open to other institutionsIdea launched in briefing at UNCTAD

X

ObjectivesAssist developing countries in:Enhancing understanding of trade and

environmental interfaceAssessing environmental effects of trade

liberalization at the national level and trade effects of environmental policies

Developing policy packagesParticipating effectively in international

deliberations

Proposed activities during first yearThematic researchCountry-level studiesTraining Policy dialoguesPublic outreach

Thematic researchEnvironmentally preferable productsSubsidies in agricultural sector

Country-level studies

Integrated assessments in specific sectors, building on UNEP experience

Policy coordination at national level, building on UNCTAD/UNDP experience

Common characteristics Sector-specific National workshops Institutional partnerships(multi-stakeholder

approaches)

Country-level studies

6 June: Call for proposals Depending on financial resources

four countries will be selected by UNCTAD/UNEP for first year

Training

4-day training courses, based on UNCTAD’s TrainforTrade 2000 package

Four countries, in particular LDCs

Policy dialogues

Least Developed CountriesIntegrated assessment techniques to

analyse the impacts of trade policiesInternational seminar on trading

opportunites for environmentally preferable products

International seminar on environmental impacts of subsidies in agriculture

Network and information exchange

WebsiteNewsletterDatabase for networking

South Africa workshop

Preliminary ideas about dates