Openness consists of two basic elements: first, timely, easy and full access to information for all those affected; and second, public participation in the decision-making process. Openness is widely recognized as being valuable to government, since it makes bureaucracies more responsive and accountable, and can bring more and better information to the decision-making process. The result of open practice is better decisions, particularly in areas with widespread impacts such as trade, environment and development policies.

Openness in making trade policy is important for environmental concerns on at least two levels. The first is at the domestic level. The ideal scenario would be for all concerned stakeholders to be informed and consulted as governments seek to define their national interests. The results of these deliberations would inform the positions taken by the country's trade negotiators.

At the multilateral level two major areas of interest are the WTO's document derestriction policies and the dispute settlement mechanisms. A WTO decision in 1996 measurably improved document derestriction from what it had been. And the WTO has constructed an exceptional Web site with access to all derestricted documents. In the lead up to the WTO's 1999 Seattle Ministerial Conference, the negotiating positions submitted by all WTO members were featured on the site, something that would have been inconceivable even a few years ago. But a number of important restrictions still remain in effect (see Box 6-1).

The dispute settlement procedures are an area of special interest; a number of environment-related trade disputes have gone through the procedures since they were established in 1995. The rules here are restrictive by the normal standards of international law: The arguments that the parties submit to the panels are restricted, in effect closing the process to public scrutiny until a judgment has been rendered. It may not be completely closed from public participation, however; the recent shrimp-turtle Appellate Body decision chose to consider unsolicited briefs submitted by non-governmental organizations. It may be that this decision will set a precedent for accepting the so-called amicus curiae (friends of the court) briefs. But critics have argued that the usefulness of such briefs is compromised if the intervenors are not allowed to read the arguments of the parties to the dispute.

Openness at the domestic and multilateral levels are linked in two ways. First, policies at the multilateral level that restrict documents may impair the ability of the public to make meaningful contributions to the debates at the national level. Second, the resistance to openness at the multilateral level by some states has occurred in part because their domestic-level processes are relatively closed, and they are wary of granting more rights to the public at the multilateral level than they grant their own nationals.

6.2 Environmental assessment of trade agreements