178
unjustifiable discrimination between countries or disguised restrictions on international trade. The protection of human, plant, and animal health or the environment
is also acknowledged in the TBT and SPS Agreements as well as in the AoA. The
WTO Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) has a mandate to contribute to
identifying and understanding the relationship between trade and the environment
in order to promote sustainable development. However, the CTE has been widely
criticized in terms of the level of success it has achieved.
When observed from the perspective of food law, much of the food–energy–
water nexus is about the connection between trade and the environment, which is a
highly contested topic. It also goes beyond the food–energy–water nexus per se,
since the international food trade has also been linked with severe threats to biodiversity, habitats, and species (see Chap. 9).
The fact that WTO law is not designed to address issues relating to the production of products due to the principle of mutual recognition is a major source of dispute in WTO law. In fact, so-called PPM (processing and production measures)
rules prohibit member States from restricting trade based on the ways in which
goods have been produced (Falkner and Jaspers 2012). Yet, in many cases, the environmental concerns associated with certain products arise from the methods used in
their processing and production, for instance through the intensive use of water and
energy (Esty 2001). The 2003 EC–Biotech case, in which the USA, Canada, and
Argentina brought WTO proceedings against the EU’s restrictions on the marketing
of genetically modified organisms offers a good example of such concerns (though
not specifically focused water or energy law).
Even though there are shortcomings in how water and energy issues are integrated into international trade law, it has been shown that WTO jurisdiction is gradually moving towards a more generous interpretation of environmental
exemptions (Falkner and Jaspers 2012).
In this context, one of the most frequently cited cases is the 1998 Shrimp-Turtle
case in which the WTO Appellate Body discussed the meaning of conservation of
exhaustible natural resources. The Appellate Body recognized that textually, Article
XX(g) of the GATT is not limited to the conservation of “mineral” or “non-living”
natural resources but also extends to “living” natural resources and thus applies also
to “renewable” natural resources, such as animals (including fish). The Appellate
Body also referred in its ruling to the preamble of the WTO Marrakesh Agreement,
which explicitly acknowledges the objective of sustainable development.
In addition to the trade-environment nexus discussed above, the question of
whether water is food is another interesting issue associated with the water-food
nexus. Water is included in the definition of food in the Codex Alimentarius, for
example. Accordingly, food means any substance, whether processed, semiprocessed or raw, which is intended for human consumption, and includes, for
example, drink.
Food and water are closely related in the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
under which the Parties must combat disease and malnutrition, through, inter alia,
the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking-water, taking into
consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution (Article 24).
A. Belinskij et al.
unjustifiable discrimination between countries or disguised restrictions on international trade. The protection of human, plant, and animal health or the environment
is also acknowledged in the TBT and SPS Agreements as well as in the AoA. The
WTO Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) has a mandate to contribute to
identifying and understanding the relationship between trade and the environment
in order to promote sustainable development. However, the CTE has been widely
criticized in terms of the level of success it has achieved.
When observed from the perspective of food law, much of the food–energy–
water nexus is about the connection between trade and the environment, which is a
highly contested topic. It also goes beyond the food–energy–water nexus per se,
since the international food trade has also been linked with severe threats to biodiversity, habitats, and species (see Chap. 9).
The fact that WTO law is not designed to address issues relating to the production of products due to the principle of mutual recognition is a major source of dispute in WTO law. In fact, so-called PPM (processing and production measures)
rules prohibit member States from restricting trade based on the ways in which
goods have been produced (Falkner and Jaspers 2012). Yet, in many cases, the environmental concerns associated with certain products arise from the methods used in
their processing and production, for instance through the intensive use of water and
energy (Esty 2001). The 2003 EC–Biotech case, in which the USA, Canada, and
Argentina brought WTO proceedings against the EU’s restrictions on the marketing
of genetically modified organisms offers a good example of such concerns (though
not specifically focused water or energy law).
Even though there are shortcomings in how water and energy issues are integrated into international trade law, it has been shown that WTO jurisdiction is gradually moving towards a more generous interpretation of environmental
exemptions (Falkner and Jaspers 2012).
In this context, one of the most frequently cited cases is the 1998 Shrimp-Turtle
case in which the WTO Appellate Body discussed the meaning of conservation of
exhaustible natural resources. The Appellate Body recognized that textually, Article
XX(g) of the GATT is not limited to the conservation of “mineral” or “non-living”
natural resources but also extends to “living” natural resources and thus applies also
to “renewable” natural resources, such as animals (including fish). The Appellate
Body also referred in its ruling to the preamble of the WTO Marrakesh Agreement,
which explicitly acknowledges the objective of sustainable development.
In addition to the trade-environment nexus discussed above, the question of
whether water is food is another interesting issue associated with the water-food
nexus. Water is included in the definition of food in the Codex Alimentarius, for
example. Accordingly, food means any substance, whether processed, semiprocessed or raw, which is intended for human consumption, and includes, for
example, drink.
Food and water are closely related in the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
under which the Parties must combat disease and malnutrition, through, inter alia,
the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking-water, taking into
consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution (Article 24).
A. Belinskij et al.