Abstract: With trade and the environment becoming increasingly interconnected, environmental impact assessments (EIAs) of trade negotiations help to integrate environmental considerations into trade-related treaty making by evaluating potential risks and opportunities, addressing public concerns, and facilitating the introduction of response measures. Despite international efforts, such ‘trade EIAs’ have not yet been universally adopted. At the domestic level, the United States, Canada, and the European Union have pioneered the use of EIAs through their institutionalized procedures for over 20 years. This article examines and compares the relevant practices of these three jurisdictions to identify major patterns and to discuss the pros and cons of existing differences in this area. It argues that the time-tested experience of these jurisdictions could provide benchmarks for consideration in promoting the widespread implementation of trade EIAs through global and regional trade regimes.

Main Conclusion: Trade EIAs are not just an analytical tool but also a crucial process involving multilayer interactions within the government, between the government and external stakeholders, and, where relevant, between negotiating parties. They provide assurance to policymakers and the public that proposed trade agreements will align with environmental priorities. At the same time, they may be limited in making precise assessments, balancing transparency and confidentiality, fully addressing public concerns, and effectively influencing decision making. Remarkably, none of the agreements that underwent a full assessment cycle in the US, Canada, and the EU was found to pose serious ecological risks to these assessing jurisdictions, whether from economically driven or regulatory factors, although this does not mean that the agreements had no environmental impact on them. Furthermore, the prospect of expanding green trade made the reviewed trade agreements even necessary for meeting environmental goals. While this underscores the general environmental supportiveness of trade, it does not eliminate the need for future EIAs, as each agreement is unique. As environmental protection and climate change responses gain importance, trade EIAs must become a routine procedure everywhere, akin to the economic assessments many countries conduct for trade agreements. In this respect, the time-tested experience of the US, Canada, and the EU can provide useful benchmarks for governmental or commissioned assessments of environmental or broader sustainability impacts on the domestic environment and beyond. Global and regional trade regimes should play a greater role as platforms for disseminating expertise and fostering cooperation in this field. With these efforts, wider adoption of trade EIAs and expanded knowledge exchange may further refine and enhance their effectiveness.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102525100010