ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses the interpretation of the common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) principle in the environmental literature and in World Trade Organization (WTO) cases. The CBDR principle is particularly relevant in relation to common global environmental problems; where countries have differential roles in contributing to causing the problems as well as different abilities to deal with the impacts of the problem. The chapter then focuses on the disputes regarding discrimination and differentiation in order to identify if clear precedents have emerged in decisions of the Panels established by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body. Only one case actually mentions the CBDR principle (the US Shrimp-Turtle case), while the other cases (India, European Union (EU), Korea, Mexico, and European Communities (EC)) discusses differentiation between countries based on their 'capabilities'. This Korea case between the Republic of Korea and the European Communities related to the ship-building industry. The Mexico case concerned a dispute between the US and Mexico regarding taxes on soft drinks.
