Although NAFTA was conceived as a trade agreement and environmental protection was given a secondary role, NAFTA 's architects, prodded by considerable pressure from NGOs and other groups, created tools and developed strategies intended to integrate environmental protection with trade expansion. Analysis of the trade/environment linkage in other agreements points out how NAFTA, although still flawed, demonstrates a viable trade/environment linkage, especially in its institutional design. The inclusion of the environmental side accord has given the agreement increased capacity to address environmental problems. The previous chapters contend that the overall purpose of the supplementary agreement in relation to trade is clear: to protect the environment, especially in those areas most vulnerable to ecological deterioration, from the intensification of economic activity generated by a free trade agreement.
This section makes a case for closer integration between trade and the environment by arguing for a strengthened and therefore more environmentally responsible agreement. NAFTA 's effects on the environment are evident in all three countries. Its impact is most seen in the border region of Mexico and the U.S. where the most severe deterioration of communities has occurred as a result of rapid growth and weak infrastructure. While the greatest amount of attention is focused on the borderland, transboundary pollutants are not restricted by political borders and therefore must be viewed and managed as shared concerns among participating countries. The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) must encourage greater participation from all levels of society to create more effective tools for protecting the environment. This institution has potential to bring about concerted action to harmonize standards and resolve disputes consistent with clear rules applicable to all three countries. It is acknowledged that the CEC cannot compel countries to comply with environmental rules that are inconsistent with national laws. However, its potential power as a political and moral force, its obligation to monitor and institute action plans, and its clear mandate to promote sustainable development give it the capability to be a stronger force than it is at present. In addition, the CEC needs to be given greater authority to set transnational environmental standards and to hand down binding judgements as opposed to advisory opinions.
Improving the performance of the CEC is only part of the solution. Environmental improvement ultimately depends on other methods to successfully promote equitable, sustainable development. Setting and enforcing environmental standards doesn't necessarily lead to equitable outcomes in a trilateral partnership in which there are enormous social and class differences. We also need to focus on methods which lessen these inequalities Providing less developed countries with greater access to modern technologies to facilitate more responsible development and environmental clean up is a must if sustainable development is to be truly achieved. This is especially true of Mexico, but it also applies to Canada and the U.S. Providing incentives such as low interest loans, research and subsidies to innovative economic development projects will assist in the development of new, environmentally sensitive technology.
Overall, trade/environment rules that promote self-sufficiency, technology transfer, effective use of natural resources and public participation are essential to complement the reform of transnational institutions.
The following proposals are drawn from the chapters and are viewed as necessary changes to improve the performance of the CEC and move the continent, under the auspices of NAFTA, to a model of development that moves us beyond neoliberalism to a more wholistic approach which integrates environment, social justice and the economy.