Environmental services and competition: A global perspective

Review of European Community and International Environmental Law

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 160-171

  Simpson, Robin ^a  

^a International trade and public utilities ^*  (Malaysia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION (ECONOMICS); COMPETITION POLICY; GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN SERVICES; WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION;

EID: 33748419033     PISSN: 09628797     EISSN: 14679388     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9388.2006.00525.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 'Opening Markets for Environmental Goods and Services' OECD Observer (September 2005), at 2.
2. M. Geloso Grosso, Managing Request - Offer Negotiations under the GATS: The Case of Environmental Services, OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No 11 (OECD, February 2005), at 7, para. 9.
3. Ibid., at 9, para. 10.
4. Ibid. See also Watertime, Background Paper on International Context (Watertime, 2004), at D7.
5. A. Brown, The Reform Agenda for Urban Water Supply and Sanitation (World Bank/Civil Society Organizations Dialogue, 2004), at slide 4. See also World Development Movement, Pipe Dreams: The Failure of the Private Sector to Invest in Water Services in Developing Countries (World Development Movement, 2006), at 49.
6. See A. Brown, ibid. See also D. Hall, Water and the Public Sector: History, Politics and Economics, paper delivered to UK Department for International Development (DFID) Water Forum (February 2006), at slide 2.
7. The Millennium Declaration adopted in September 2000 by the UN General Assembly for water and sanitation aims to halve by the year 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water. See UN Millennium Declaration (UN Res 55/2, 8 September 2000), para. 19. In 2002, the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development added the equivalent proportionate aim for basic sanitation. See Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, Report of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (UN Doc. A/CONF. 199/20, 4 September 2002), Resolution 2.
8. Consumers Information Network, CIN Report on Water and Sanitation Project - Nairobi (CIN, 2004), at 2.
9. A. de Moor, Perverse Incentives (Earth Council, 1999).
10. A. Brown, The Reform Agenda for Urban Water Supply and Sanitation, paper delivered to Civil Society/World Bank (WB) Seminar (World Bank, 2004), at slide 28.
11. A. Morel and M. Loury, Utility Sub-Contractors for Local Water and Sanitation Service Providers in Africa, paper presented to World Water Week 2004 (World Bank, 2004).
12. C. Ugaz, 'Consumer Participation and Pro-Poor Regulation in Latin America', in C. Ugaz (ed.), Utility Privatization and Regulation: A Fair Deal for Consumers? (Edward Elgar, 2003), at 84.
13. Public and Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility/Water and Sanitation Programme (PPIAF/WSP), New Designs for Water and Sanitation Transactions (World Bank, 2002), at 43.
14. Ibid.
15. A. Eustache, What Do We Know About Sub-Saharan Africa's Infrastructure and the Impact of its 1990s Reforms? paper delivered to World Bank seminar 'Towards Growth and Poverty Reduction' (World Bank, June 2005), at 40.
16. M. Solanes, Efficiency, Equity and Liberalization of Water Services (OECD, 2005). See also S. Rosenthal, The Manila Water Concessions and their Impact on the Poor (Yale University Press, 2001); J. Esguerra, The Corporate Muddle of Manila's Water Concessions WaterAid/Tearfund, 2003).
17. See S. Rosenthal, ibid.
18. C. Van den Berg, 'Water Concessions: Who Wins, Who Loses? 'Public Policy for the Private Sector (World Bank, October 2000), at 6.
19. V. Foster, E.R. Tiongson and C.R. Laderchi, Poverty and Social Impact Analysis: Key Issues in Utility Reform (World Bank, 2004).
20. J.L. Guasch Granting and Renegotiating Infrastructure Concessions (World Bank Institute, 2004), at 13.
21. R. Simpson, Universal Access in the Water and Sanitation Sector, paper delivered to services experts seminar (OECD, February 2005).
22. M. Kariuki and B. Wandera, 'Regulation of Cess-Pit Emptying Services: A Case Study of Public-Private Initiatives in Dar es Salaam', in Infrastructure for Development: Private Solutions and the Poor (PPIAF/WB/ DFID, 2000).
23. M. Kariuki, Making Space for the Urban Poor in Public - Private Partnerships, paper delivered to regional conference of Consumers International - Africa (Consumers International, 2002).
24. World Bank, World Development Report 2004 (World Bank, 2004).
25. Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU), Public Services Work (PSIRU, 2005).
26. S. Misana and G. Karlsson, Generating Opportunities (2001) (United Nations Development Programme, 2001).
27. See PPIAF/WSP, n. 13 above, at 43.
28. See A. Eustache, n. 15 above, at 40.
29. WTO, Services Sectoral Classification List (MTN.GNS/W/120, 10 July 1991).
30. For a discussion of the complexities of classification, see M. Cossy, Water Services and the GATS: Selected Legal Issues, paper presented to OECD services experts seminar (February 2005), published in E. Brown Weiss et al., Water and International Economic Law (Oxford University Press, 2005).
31. UN Statistical Office - Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, Provisional Central Product Classification, Statistical Papers Service M, No 77 (1998)
32. General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) (Marrakesh, 15 April 1994), Article 19.
33. Ibid., Article 20.
34. Ibid., Article 1(3)(b).
35. Ibid., Article 1(3)(c).
36. Draft Cancun Ministerial Text (JOB (03)150/Rev.1, 24 August 2003).
37. Hong Kong Declaration (WT/MIN(05)/DEC, 18 December 2005).
38. Doha Declaration (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, 14 November 2001), para. 7.
39. Consumers International, GATS An Impact Assessment (Consumers International, 2001).
40. url. http://www.tacd.org/ docs/?id=264. See also WTO, Understanding the WTO (WTO, 2004).
41. WTO Secretariat, Working Party on Domestic Regulation (WTO WPDR), 'Necessity Tests' in the WTO: Note By the Secretariat (S/WPDR/W/27, 3 December) 2003
42. This is the WTO committee that is charged with oversight of the GATS negotiations, consisting of WTO member representatives.
43. See GATS, n. 32 above, Article 6(4)(b).
44. See WTO WPDR, n. 41 above.
45. See M. Cossy, n. 30 above.
46. Consumers International, Bridging the GAPS: The Case for a General Agreement on Public Services (Consumers International, 2005).
47. See M. Cossy, n. 30 above, at 11.
48. See Consumers International, n. 46 above.
49. See GATS, n. 32 above, Article 20.
50. North American Free Trade Agreement (Washington, Ottawa, Mexico City, 17 December 1992).
51. See discussion in S.M. Stephenson and F.J. Prieto, 'Regional Liberalization of Trade in Services', in B. Hoekman, A. Mattoo and P. English, Development, Trade and the WTO (World Bank, 2002), chapter 33.
52. See GATS, n. 32 above, Article 19. See also Hong Kong Declaration, n. 37 above.
53. OECD/International Water Association, Water Management and Investment in the New Independent States - Almaty 2000 (OECD, 2001), chapter 3.
54. P. Xavier, Regulation for Universal Service in a Competitive and Technologically Dynamic Telecommunications Network, paper delivered to OECD meeting of Special Group on Regulatory Policy (5-6 December 2005), at 17, para. 61.
55. There is no standard definition for USOs because they can take various forms. For example, a USO may take the form of a burden on government to ensure that all citizens get services or take the form of an imposition on a company often in return for some type of benefits. USOs are particularly well developed in the telecommunications field. The European Commission's Eighth Report from the Commission of 3 December 2002 on the Implementation of the Telecommunications Regulatory Package, COM (2002) 695 final, at 42, defined it as follows: 'The principal aim of ... universal service policy ... is to ensure that a defined set of services is made available to all users, independently of their geographical location ... at an affordable price ...'. 'The essential point is that the distributional policies that that implies have not been found to be GATS incompatible. The WTO reference paper attached to the WTO Agreement on Basic Telecoms (see WTO, Telecommunications Services: Reference Paper - Negotiating Group on Basic Telecommunications (24 April 1996)), at section 3, acknowledges the 'right' of each member country 'to define the kind of universal service obligation it wishes to maintain' providing this is done on a non-discriminatory basis. In other infrastructure sectors, it is still early days regarding more precise definitions; the point is that market mechanisms can be overridden to some extent.
56. K. Komives et al., Water, Electricity and the Poor - Who benefits from Utility Subsidies? (World Bank, 2005).
57. See P. Xavier, n. 54 above. See also OECD Working Party of the Trade Committee, Liberalizing Network Infrastructure Services and the GATS (OECD, September 2005).
58. WTO Negotiating Group on Basic Telecommunications, Telecommunications Reference Paper (WTO, 24 April 1996), available at .
59. See M. Cossy, n. 30 above.
60. See Consumers International, n. 46 above.