About this session
In light of the number of trade-related measures with climate objectives being implemented or considered by a growing range of countries, this session will review possible approaches to enhancing transparency, coherence, interoperability, and equivalences of such measures while addressing equity and development concerns.
It will explore specific collaborative outcomes ranging from transparency requirements to international guidance on the design and implementation of these measures or aspects of them, such as on greenhouse gas emissions and carbon accounting methodologies, and climate standards.
The dialogue will take place in a “brainstorming mode” and will provide an opportunity for in-depth discussions based on the following guiding questions:
(i) What collaborative approaches could be envisaged to reduce fragmentation and enhance coherence, transparency, equity, and interoperability in the design and implementation of trade-related climate measures?
(ii) How to connect the dots between the various institutions, processes, and initiatives addressing different dimensions relevant to enhanced cooperation on trade-climate measures (e.g. at the WTO, UNFCCC, Climate Club, Inclusive Forum on Carbon Mitigation Approaches (IFCMA), Integrated Forum on Climate Change and Trade (IFCCT), G20, BRICS Laboratory for Climate, Trade, and Sustainable Development, sectoral collaborations, private sector initiatives, among others)?
(iii) Should efforts to increase cooperation focus on specific trade-climate measures or sectors, or is there scope for a more general or horizontal approach, either on policy design and implementation, or on specific technical issues that underpin measures?
(iv) What specific types of trade-related measures with climate objectives or technical issues could benefit from enhanced cooperation? What are some of the neglected issues that warrant attention and where could these best be addressed (bilateral, regional, multilateral or sectoral)?
(v) What are key areas where the WTO has specific expertise and could add value, in light of work underway in other international processes? What type of outcomes could be pursued (e.g. enhanced transparency, non-binding guidance on the design and implementation of trade-climate measures, voluntary pledges, others)?