Tony Juniper and Ronnie Hall

In a conference room on the shores of Lake Geneva, trade negotiators are drawing up plans that could eventually have a devastating impact on the global environment. The World Trade Organisation’s member states are negotiating what they call “non-agricultural market access’’ or Nama, and have started compiling a wish list of national laws they would very much like to bury.

Analysis by Friends of the Earth has revealed nearly 200 challenges so far. They range from measures to fight climate change to protection of forests and fish stocks. Those labels that manufacturers have to put on freezers and fridges that state how energy efficient they are? South Korea wants them to go. American laws promoting fuel efficiency? They, too, are “excessive and unreasonable”, says South Korea. Meanwhile, the US wants to stop other countries promoting fuel efficiency, arguing that countries should not be giving tax breaks to people with smaller cars - as is done in the UK.

Measures controlling the use of toxic chemicals are taking a hammering, too, with countries including Japan and Argentina challenging legislation that seeks to manage the environmental hazards posed by certain chemicals. Labels and regulations relating to the use of some dyes, mercuric oxide, nickel oxide and 1,2-dichloroethane are all mentioned specifically.

Even chemicals legislation that has been in place since the 1960s could be under threat. Forests and fish stocks are not being spared either. Challenges to eco-labelling and certification systems could dismantle the Forest Stewardship Council certification scheme, as well as government timber procurement schemes and EU illegal logging legislation.

The negotiators seem to be oblivious to the fact that three-quarters of the world’s fish stocks have collapsed, are on the verge of collapsing or are just recovering. Nor do they appreciate that millions of artisanal fishing communities that rely completely on fish for food and income are finding it difficult to secure a livelihood. The WTO approach seems clear: trade takes priority. Even the simplest recycling measures could be under threat.

The Nama negotiations also include proposals to liberalise and increase the trade in gemstones, precious metals and primary aluminium. If the US gets its way, the same would apply to all natural resources. This could mean more raw materials on the market at ever lower prices, which might be good for some companies now, but is not good for the conservation of dwindling natural resources.

While there is a chance that some of these challenges will be withdrawn because governments have not agreed to negotiate in some of the areas listed, most of them could stay the course as they are backed by powerful corporate lobby gro-ups. There is a possibility, too, that negotiators will seek to trade reductions in environmental standards in Europe, and other industrialised co-untries, for corporate access to mo-re and cheaper natural resou rces in developing countries. —The Guardian