World Trade Organisation System

Synchronization of the legal nexus between market trade and environmental protection


  • Emmanuel Mensah Aboagye Law School, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
  • Nana Osei Owusu Xi'an Jiangtong University
  • Monica Yamoah Law School, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law
  • Richmond Ashiagbor Ocean University of China, Qingdao, Shandong, China
  • Kwaku Obeng Effah Department of Political Science, University of Ghana



World Trade Organization, Trade, environment, coordination


In today’s world, sustainable development has become the consensus of the international community. With the development and progress of the world economy and the launch of the wave of environmental protection in the world, market trade and environmental protection issues have gradually gained the full attention of government departments and people in many countries around the world, and gradually developed into one of the core issues in the global political, economic and multi-industry fields. The laws and regulations on environmental protection adopted by international organizations and countries and the basic rules of market trade constitute the basis for applying environmental control supervision. The researchers adopted a systematic online search to identify journal articles, reports, and other relevant documents related to the market trade and environmental protection. The online search was done mainly on Google, Google Scholar and Bing to retrieve related documents on market trade and environmental protection. The study unraveled a complex relationship between market trade and environmental protection, and the international community has paid too much attention.  Foreign trade policy aims to avoid the development of a new market trade restriction and implementation program, protect market trade, eliminate the existing barriers to the market trade, restrict market trade laws and regulations, and finally achieve the way to increase the effectiveness of market trade.  Therefore, environmental protection and market trade are two systems, and it is a core contradiction to abide by which fundamental principles are observed. To solve and deal with the relationship between market trade and the environment, it must redefine the relevant influencing factors in these two systems. The researchers suggested that through the coordination of management, there should be a careful study from the experience of relevant organizations, such as the European Union, NAFTA, OECD and then put forward specific ideas for coordinated management.


Ahmed, A., & Mustofa, J. (2016). Role of soft law in environmental protection: an overview. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research, 4(2), 1-18.

Al- Fatlawi, S. H. (2018). International Journal of Asian Social Science NATIONALISTS AND ENVIRONMENTALISTS WHICH ARE ANTI- GLOBALIZATION AND THE WTO Keywords. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 8(5), 256–264.

Alola, A. A. (2019). The trilemma of trade, monetary and immigration policies in the United States: Accounting for environmental sustainability. Science of the Total Environment, 658(1), 260–267.

Araujo, B. A. M. (2016). The EU deep trade agenda: Law and policy. Oxford University Press.

Aseeva, A. (2018). ( Un ) Sustainable Development ( s ) in International Economic Law : A Quest for Sustainability. Sustainability, 10(1), 4022.

Barrett, A., Lawlor, J., & Scott, S. (2019). The fiscal system and the polluter pays principle: a case study of Ireland. Routledge.

Bennett, N. J. (2016). Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 30(3), 582–592.

Borowy I. (2017) Negotiating Environment: The Making of the OECD Environment Committee and the Polluter Pays Principle, 1968–1972. In: Leimgruber M., Schmelzer M. (eds) The OECD and the International Political Economy Since 1948. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Bowling, C., Pierson, E., & Ratté, S. (2016). The common concern of humankind: a potential framework for a new international legally binding instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in the high seas. White Paper, 1-15.

Correa, C. M., & Yusuf, A. A. (Eds.). (2016). Intellectual Property and International Trade: The TRIPS Agreement: The TRIPS Agreement. Kluwer Law International BV.

Creswell, J. W., & Zhang, W. (2009). The application of mixed methods designs to trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 22(6), 612–621.

Dechezleprêtre, A., & Sato, M. (2017). The impacts of environmental regulations on competitiveness. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11(2), 183-206.

Faces, T. M. (2016). The Many Faces of Globalization (Vol. 2).

Feng, L., & Liao, W. (2015). Legislation , plans , and policies for prevention and control of air pollution in China : achievements , challenges , and improvements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(1), 1549–1558.

Forman, L., & Macnaughton, G. (2015). Moving Theory into Practice : Human Rights Impact Assessment of Intellectual Property Rights in Trade Agreements. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 7(1), 109–138.

Garnett, K., Calster, G. Van, & Reins, L. (2018). Towards an innovation principle : an industry trump or shortening the odds on environmental protection ? Law, Innovation and Technology, 10(1), 1–14.

Glicksman, R. L., Markell, D. L., Buzbee, W. W., Mandelker, D. R., & Bodansky, D. (2019). Environmental protection: law and policy. Aspen Publishers.

Grubb, M., Koch, M., Thomson, K., Sullivan, F., & Munson, A. (2019). The'Earth Summit'Agreements: A Guide and Assessment: An Analysis of the Rio'92 UN Conference on Environment and Development (Vol. 9). Routledge.

Hefferman, C. (2013). Qualitative research approach.Retrieved January, 8, 2019

Hoch, S., Michaelowa, A., Espelage, A., & Kathrin, A. (2019). Governing complexity : How can the interplay of multilateral environmental agreements be harnessed for effective international market ‑ based climate policy instruments ? Convention on Biological Diversity Common but Differentiated Responsibilities Vienna. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 19(1), 595–613.

Huang, Y. (2016). Understanding China’s Belt & Road Initiative: Motivation, framework and assessment. China Economic Review, 40(2016), 314–321.

Jackson, G. (2018). Corporate governance in Germany and Japan: Liberalization pressures and responses during the 1990s. In The End of Diversity? (pp. 261-305). Cornell University Press.

Kanie, N. (2018). Governance with multilateral environmental agreements: A healthy or ill-equipped fragmentation?. In Green Planet Blues (pp. 137-153). Routledge.

Keef, A. S. M. (2018). Whose greed , whose grievance , and whose opportunity ? Effects of foreign direct investments ( FDI ) on internal conflict. World Development, 106(1), 187–206.

Khan, M. I., & Chang, Y. C. (2018). Environmental challenges and current practices in China-A thorough analysis. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(7), 1–20.

Khan, S. A. (2016). E-products , E-waste and the Basel Convention : Regulatory Challenges and Impossibilities of International Environmental Law. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 25(2), 248–260.

Knox, J. (2018). Framework principles on human rights and the environment. UN Human Rights Special Procedures: Special Rapportuer, Independent Experts & Working Groups, 1–25.

Kostka, G. (2016). Command without control : The case of China ’ s environmental target system. Regulation & Governance, 10(1), 58–74.

Li, K., Fang, L., & He, L. (2019). How population and energy price affect China ’ s environmental pollution ? Energy Policy, 129(February), 386–396.

Lim, S., Menaldo, V., & Prakash, A. (2015). Foreign aid, economic globalization, and pollution. Policy Sciences, 48(2), 181-205.

Mackey, B., DellaSala, D. A., Kormos, C., Lindenmayer, D., Kumpel, N., Zimmerman, B.,Watson, J. E. M. (2014). Policy Options for the World’s Primary Forests in Multilateral Environmental Agreements. Conservation Letters, 8(2), 139–147. doi:10.1111/conl.12120

Martine, G. (2015). Economy , society and environment in the 21 st century : three pillars or trilemma of sustainability ? Revista Brasileira de Estudos de População, 32(3), 433–459.

Meyer, J. (2017). European Review of History : Revue européenne d ’ histoire Who should pay for pollution ? The OECD , the European Communities and the emergence of environmental policy in the early 1970s. European Review of History: Revue Européenne d’histoire, 24(3), 377–398.


Mykhnenko, V., & Wolff, M. (2018). State rescaling and economic convergence State rescaling and economic convergence. Regional Studies, 53(4), 1–16.

Nwokoro, C. V., & Chima, F. O. (2017). Impact of Environmental Degradation on Agricultural Production and Poverty in Rural Nigeria. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 7(2), 6–14.

Puplampu, K. P. (2016). The World Trade Organisation, global trade and agriculture. In Beyond the'African Tragedy' (pp. 257-270). Routledge

Samuel, G., Mbabazie, M., & Shukla, J. (2016). Evaluation of factors influencing sustainability of water projects in gahondo: A case of water projects in Muhanga District, Rwanda. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 23(2), 4.

Shaffer, G., Wolfe, R., & Le, V. (2015). Can Informal Law Discipline Subsidies? Journal of International Economic Law, 18(4), 711–741.

Sovacool, B. K. (2017). Reviewing , Reforming , and Rethinking Global Energy Subsidies : Towards a Political Economy Research Agenda. Ecological Economics, 135(1), 150–163.

Stafford-smith, M., Griggs, D., Gaffney, O., & Ullah, F. (2016). Integration : the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability Science, 12(6), Stafford-Smith, M., Griggs, D., Gaffney, O., Ullah.

Stavropoulos, S., Wall, R., & Xu, Y. (2018). Environmental regulations and industrial competitiveness : evidence from China. Applied Economics, 50(12), 1378–1394.

Tian, W., & Xiang, G. A. O. (2019). ScienceDirect Reflection and operationalization of the common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities principle in the transparency framework under the international climate change regime. Advances in Climate Change Research, 9(4), 253–263.

Tien, N. H., Phu, P. P., Phuc, N. T., Duc, L. D. M., & Thuc, T. D. (2019). Sustainable development and environmental management in Vietnam. International Journal of Research in Finance and Management, 3(1), 72-79.

Trachtman, J. P. (2016). The international law of economic migration. A Companion to European Union Law and International Law, 506-518.

Tuffour, I. (2017). A critical overview of interpretative phenomenological analysis: A contemporary qualitative research approach. Journal of Healthcare Communications, 2(4), 1–5.

Valencia, A. (2016). Human rights trade-offs in times of economic growth: The long-term capability impacts of extractive-led development. Springer.

Van Hoecke, M., & Mary, Q. (2016). Methodology of comparative legal research methodology of comparative legal research. November.

Xu, Y., Fan, X., Zhang, Z., & Zhang, R. (2020). Trade liberalization and haze pollution: Evidence from China. Ecological Indicators, 109(1), 105825.

Zhang, M., Liu, X., Ding, Y., & Wang, W. (2019). Science of the Total Environment How does environmental regulation affect haze pollution governance ? — An empirical test based on Chinese provincial panel data. Science of the Total Environment, 695(1), 133905.