414
Anuradha R. V.
to more effectively enforce its domestic laws regarding illegal wildlife transshipment and to enact a new endangered species act that brought transshipment under the country’s enforcement mandate and increased penalties tenfold. The study observes, however, that the causality for Singapore’s law is difficult to determine and that the country’s environmental efforts may also be related to the ASEAN-wide push to cooperate on stronger implementation and enforcement of measures against illegal wildlife trade (OECD 2007, 125). The effectiveness of PTAs in promoting the enforcement of environmental laws has not been definitively studied. Domestic enforcement of environmental laws is often influenced by such factors as availability of adequate resources and the presence or absence of effective institutional mechanisms. Although several PTAs entered into by the United States and the EU specify that the developed-country partner would provide assistance through financial resources and technical capacity-building support, effective enforcement of environmental laws has not necessarily resulted. A recent report by the U.S. General Accountability Office (U.S. GAO 2009) studies U.S. PTAs with Chile, Singapore, Morocco, and Jordan and concludes that although the trading partners have improved their environmental laws, enforcement has been a challenge and that U.S. assistance has been limited in this regard. The report cites lack of reliable funding as one of the main reasons for lack of progress on environmental provisions, and it identifies the absence of effective elements for monitoring and managing environmental projects as a shortcoming. NAFTA and the NAAEC Some of the significant studies and analyses of the effectiveness of the implementation of environmental provisions under a PTA have looked at the NAAEC, the environmental side agreement to NAFTA. These studies highlight some advantages and practical limitations of implementing environmental provisions under a PTA. A recent paper from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) emphasizes the contribution of NAFTA and the NAAEC in providing a clean and healthy environment for residents along the U.S.–Mexican border.21 Independent studies (for example, Markell and Knox 2003) have commended the technical cooperation efforts of the North American Commission for Environment Cooperation (NACEC) that was established under the agreement and have identified a number of achievements: • The commission’s role in establishing a pollution release and transfer registry (PRTR) in Mexico
• Its support for research and symposiums dedicated to understanding the effects of trade on the environment in North America • The establishment of public submission mechanisms whereby civil society organizations and citizens can petition the commission on issues relating to compliance with the agreement’s environmental obligations (Articles 14 and 15 of the NAAEC) • The initiation of pilot funding programs to build the environmental capacity of small and medium-size enterprises and civil society organizations. Other studies have highlighted some limitations in implementing environmental provisions under the NAAEC. Inadequate resources are blamed for the shortcomings. For instance, Gallagher (2004, 74–76) reasons, using persuasive data and analysis, that environmental conditions worsened in Mexico in the post-NAFTA period and that Mexico failed to steer the benefits of economic integration toward increased environmental protection. Gallagher points out that the NACEC was not “designed to significantly reverse environmental consequences of economic growth in Mexico” and argues that the NACEC, with its annual budget of US$9 million, was “insufficient” to make a dent in the problems that cost the Mexican economy US$40 million annually. Similarly, Hufbauer and Schott (2005, 159–60) find that the budgetary allocation for the NAAEC was inadequate for its mandate and represents an “insignificant fraction of resources dedicated to the environment in North America.” Audley and Ulmer (2003, 3) evaluate U.S. trade policy and capacity-building initiatives in the context of PTAs and conclude that it is “challenging to translate good intentions into effective policy.” Technical and Financial Assistance Technical and financial assistance is intrinsically linked to the issue of implementation of environmental provisions. The financial costs of implementation, and the costs of framing new legal and institutional frameworks, could be especially high for small and medium-size enterprises in developing countries (India 2000). Two studies for the World Bank emphasize that to ensure implementation of the environmental provisions of a PTA, it would be more rational to address costs and capacity-building requirements than to resort to trade sanctions in the event of noncompliance. Wheeler (2000) shows that there is a cost-benefit rationale for requiring stricter environmental controls while fostering economic relationships between countries but that sustained support