|
|
General Agreement on Tarrifs and Trade (GATT)
The GATT was established in 1947 to foster free trade&emdash;that is, the removal of trade barriers such as tariffs and export bans. It was thought that, if trade was unimpeded by such barriers, global economic growth could be fostered and each country would prosper as a result. Since 1947 there have been several rounds of negotiations to update the GATT rules. The latest round&emdash;the Uruguay round&emdash;began in 1986 in Uruguay with 108 countries represented; it was still continuing in June 1993. Negotiations are kept secret. Countries that break the GATT rules can be called to account before a disputes panel which can punish them. Although the GATT holds free trade to be the ideal, it does allow many exceptions to the rules, particularly where countries seek to protect local industries from competition from firms in other countries. As a result, many subsidies, tariffs and 'voluntary export restraints' remain in place. As was seen in chapter 16, third-world nations have often been disadvantaged by such protectionism, and could gain from the opening up of markets in affluent countries that might result from the GATT talks. However, third-world activists argue that low-income nations are disadvantaged by the GATT. A major concern that people in low-income countries share with some people in high-income countries is the degree to which the GATT rules will interfere with a country's right to set its own internal laws and regulations. This has grave implications for environmental protection measures that countries may individually or jointly wish to take. It is for these reasons that environmental groups such as Greenpeace, World Wide Fund for Nature and Friends of the Earth are opposed to the GATT. Greenpeace International argues that free trade is detrimental to the environment, particularly when it takes place on a global scale. Not only does global trade increase transport and energy costs, and threaten cultural and biological diversity; but, Greenpeace argues, environmental and social costs associated with producing goods are often not seen or borne by those who consume those goods in other countries.
Source: Sharon Beder, The Nature of sustainable Development, 2nd ed., Scribe, Newham, Victoria, 1996, pp. 185-7.
|
Implications
for Environmental Standards
