Abstract
The conflict between international environmental conservation and international free trade is not a battle between good and evil, but a struggle between reconciling the good with the good. Indeed, the international community has recognized the growing "need for rules to enhance [the] positive interaction between trade and environmental measures, for the promotion of sustainable development."' The contracting parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade [hereinafter GATT] agreed to formalize this principle during the Uruguay Round in April of 1994 by establishing a Committee on Trade and the Environment [hereinafter CTE]. This was an important step toward commingling international trade and environmental policies as GATT had been seen as a strictly trade oriented, multilateral agreement.
This Comment focuses on the Panel Reports issued in 1991 and 1994, commonly referred to as Tuna/Dolphin I and H respectively, which addressed the MMPA's conflicts with GATT. Part I briefly outlines the purpose of the MMPA and its general regulatory scheme as it affects foreign fishing fleets. Part II examines the Panel Reports and their conclusions. Part III analyzes the reactions of both the United States and the international community in the wake of the Panel Reports and presents several approaches for avoiding future conflicts between trade and the environment. The Comment concludes with a global outlook on the possibility of harmonizing trade with environmental conservation in the near future.
Recommended Citation
Urgese, Joseph J.
(1998)
"Dolphin Protection and the Mammal Protection Act Have Met Their Match: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade,"
Akron Law Review: Vol. 31:
Iss.
3, Article 5.
Available at:
https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol31/iss3/5