1. Unlike most international environmental law, GATT possesses the institutions and prestige to enforce its provisions. Is this simply because GATT is older and has developed better dispute resolution mechanisms, or is it because the global community puts greater emphasis on commodities and trade than on the environment and conservation?

2. In the United States, unregulated commerce failed to provide for environmental protection and sustainable natural resource management. That is why environmental regulatory laws, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, were adopted. If free trade has failed to ensure environmental protection at the national level, how will GATT’s free trade provisions provide environmental protection at the international level? Is an unregulated market the proper mechanism for saving the environment?

3. Leaving aside the question of whether an unregulated market can protect the environment, are there ways to use the market and financial incentives to induce environmentally responsible behavior? Consider the use of subsidies and tax breaks for industries or practices that benefit, or minimize damage, to the environment. Are these types of incentives or assistance compatible with GATT’s free trade provisions?

4. Compared with GATT, NAFTA and the European Community have done a better job of responding to environmental concerns. What lessons can GATT learn from these regional trade regimes?