The International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO (ITC) was created more than 30 years ago, in 1964 by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and since 1968 it has been operated jointly by GATT (now WTO) and the United Nations, the latter acting through the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). It is the focal point in the United Nations system for technical cooperation with developing countries in trade promotion. ITC works with developing countries to set up effective national trade promotion and export development programmes for expanding their exports and improving their import operations. In addition to specific technical cooperation projects ITC also provides services from its headquarters in Geneva, which include publications on trade promotion, export development, international marketing, import operations and foreign trade training, as well as trade information and trade statistics of various types.

In November 1994 the Joint Advisory Group of the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO noted that ITC attached particular importance to assistance in the environmental considerations of international trade. The Group acknowledged that ITC had an important role to play in this matter in collaboration with UNCTAD and WTO and requested ITC to prepare a strategy paper on the subject for submission to the Group's 28th session.

With a view to ensuring closer cooperation between UNCTAD and ITC at the operational level the two organisations jointly reviewed their ongoing and planned activities in trade and the environment. The review concluded that the activities of the two organisations in this field were complementary and that there was scope for continued cooperation.

ITC has also an important role to play in support of work carried out by the WTO Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), in which it has had observer status since the Committee was established in January 1995. It may be noted, however, that, as yet, there is no WTO Agreement on Trade and Environment. In the report of the CTE submitted to the first WTO Ministerial Conference, which was held in Singapore in December 1996, there was a reference (ITEM 3B) to the ITC Eco-labelling workshop in Geneva in June 1995. It stated that "a number of individual case studies demonstrated the pragmatic approach of some developing country textile exporters in meeting non-product related PPM (Processes and Production Methods) requirements". 

There has been a significant increase over the last few years in the use of eco-labels, i.e. environmental labels attached to a variety of products to attract the attention of consumers about the environmentally positive features of the products. Generally these labels are voluntary and mostly used for the promotion of the products on the basis of their environmentally friendly characteristics. In the case of textiles and clothing there are for the time being no labels which have been enforced by mandatory rules.

Eco-labels are normally issued either by Government supported or private enterprises once it has been proved that the product of the applicant has met the criteria set by them for the label. The criteria for the use of eco-labels is mostly based on the "cradle-to-grave" approach, i.e. the life-cycle analysis of the product. The cradle-to-grave approach for textiles and clothing is making the assessment of the impact on the environment of the product during its life-cycle: processing of raw materials, production, distribution, consumption (maintenance, i.e. washing, ironing, dry-cleaning) and finally disposal of the product. Admittedly there are big differences between various eco-labelling schemes, some of which are based on detailed analysis of the environmental impacts as again some other systems may analyse only certain stages of the life-cycle.

There are now eco-labelling schemes both in developed and developing countries. The following list includes some of the government sponsored and some private labelling schemes:

The EU eco-labels are valid in all 15 member countries, but the national ones are normally valid only in one country. The exception to this rule is Nordic Swan, which is valid in all Nordic countries. This is naturally a potential problem for developing country producers, since they would have to apply for the eco-award in several countries.

Producers/exporters in developing countries are somewhat apprehensive about these eco-labelling schemes which may one day become a disadvantage vis-à-vis local manufacturers. These schemes may eventually reduce the chances for market access and there may also be some incentive schemes in the future for environmentally friendly products.

Lately the consumers in several European markets have become acquainted with so-called Fair Trade label. These labels mainly focus on the improvement of living and working conditions in those developing countries where the labelled products are coming from. Environmental issues, however, play a somewhat minor role within the Fair Trade labels. Products are normally agro-based products, such as tea, coffee, honey and textiles. The best known is Max Havelaar label, which was launched in the Netherlands in 1988 for coffee. The Trans Fair International was established in 1992 by the European free Trade association and Trans Fair Germany. The main focus is the social aspects related to people working in agriculture in developing countries. The market for fair trade labelled products is still rather limited, even though it has been gradually growing. In Switzerland the major supermarket retailer, MIGROS, is gradually becoming environmentally friendly. The suppliers in developing countries are also helped to improve the working conditions, health care etc. 

Over the last few years ITC activities in the textile and clothing sector have taken into account the recent developments in the field of environmentally friendly textiles and clothing. Some years ago it became evident that the fast-moving changes in the area of ecologically friendly products, added by an array of new country-specific schemes of eco-labelling, were and are causing a lot of confusion and concern amongst the producers/exporters of textiles and clothing in developing countries and transition economies. 

The report was well received, both in developing and developed countries, and it proved that there is a great need for information amongst the developing country producers in this sector. The report has been widely distributed and it has been used as resource material in many ITC workshops and seminars related to the international trade in textiles and clothing.

In June 1995, ITC organized a workshop in Geneva on Eco-labelling. It invited representatives of a number of developing countries namely: Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe. Amongst the invitees were also representatives of various eco-labelling schemes, such as EC, Swan (Sweden), Good Environmental Choice Campaign(Sweden), Eco-Tex (Germany), Blue Angel (Germany) etc. A number of third party inspection, testing and certification bodies were also present as well as some retailers, who are actively involved in eco-labelling and related matters. Several international organizations also attended the workshop: ISA, ISO, ITCB, OECD, UNCTAD, UNEP and WTO.

Some of the major problem areas, which were highlighted during the workshop included: information, transparency, eco-labels, problems in developing countries and market factors. There seemed to be lack of information; basic concepts and terminology were confusing. Furthermore, there seemed to be no clear definition of eco-label parametres and there are significant differences between various eco-labelling schemes. In this connection it may be noted that the European Commission published a directive in May 1996 for the EU- eco-labels for T-shirts and bed linen. By May 1999 only nine EC eco-labels had been awarded to producers of T-shirts from a number of EU-countries.

In March 1999 the existing criteria for T-shirts and bed linen were eventually included in a larger EU parametre for all textiles and clothing products, as well as yarn and fabrics for use in clothing or interior textiles. The new rules aim in particular at promoting the reduction of water pollution related to the main processes of the textile manufacturing chain starting from fibre production to dyeing and finishing of fabrics. The criteria also include different emissions to air and relevant toxicological issues, as well as setting an appropriate standard for the fitness for use of the final product. It may also be mentioned that the criteria does exclude the use of dyes that are carcinogenic (certain AZO-dyes). This means that the regulation for banning a number of AZO-dyes in Germany some three years ago by the German Ministry of Health will then cover all the 15 EU member states for those products which will be awarded the EU eco-label for textiles and clothing. The criteria will be valid for three years, and it will be revised early 2002. During the period leading up to revision due attention will be given to a number of issues, such as the final disposal of textiles. This will also include the question of recycling, further examining the issue of dry-cleaning and that of waste water treatment etc.

It remains to be seen whether the interest amongst the producers/exporters towards the new EU eco-label criteria will be any better than that towards T-shirts and bed linen. One reason for the luke-warm reception amongst the possible applicants has no doubt been the voluntary nature of the EU eco-label. The producers/exporters/traders do not seem to be convinced about the possible advantages of attaching the EU eco-labels to their products. It is true that generally there is a positive attitude in Western countries vis-à-vis environmentally friendly products and production methods, but that does not necessarily mean that the consumers would be prepared to sacrifice fashion, colours etc. for the sake of the environment when making decisions about the purchases of textiles and clothing.

Another problem area is natural dyes which have attracted the producers of ecologically sound products. Not so long ago colours seemed to have vanished from fashion due to environmental trends and textiles were primarily off-white, often in loom-state. Colours, however, have come back and from time to time the question of natural dyes comes up. According to industry sources it takes about 20 grams of synthetic dyestuffs to dye 1 kg of textile fabrics to a medium shade colour. To obtain the same with vegetable dyes about 1 kg of dried leaves would be needed, i.e. an equivalent of 5-10 kg of freshly picked leaves. This means that natural dyes are not really a commercially viable alternative and they should primarily be used for niche market products only. The same will probably apply to the production of so-called coloured cotton, which is an environmentally friendly product with a (limited) variety of appealing natural colours. So far the limited number of colours, such as blue, green, brown and purple, has been one of the obstacles for growth. Coloured cotton is being produced in Peru, Brazil, the US, France Australia, Israel, China etc.

As regard transparency there is a problem in setting the criteria and standards of different schemes. Furthermore the different sectors in developing countries have not been included in the process of formulating criteria and setting standards. One recent example for the difficulty in developing a criteria is the proposal for the criteria of recycling due to the fact that there is no feasible method to analyse the fibre content of the recycled product.

One of the main problems with existing eco-label schemes is the sheer number. The selected criteria for specific schemes does not have a common range and the eco-labelling schemes do not take into account particular environmental and labour conditions in individual developing countries. Additional problems for developing countries included the lack of an infrastructure for testing, auditing and verification procedures in developing countries. The high cost of the procedures, the lack of technical know-how and the difficulty of controlling the various stages of the life-cycle have also made the export efforts more difficult. The competitiveness may also be affected by higher costs incurred in compliance with the latest requirements. As regards the markets it should be remembered that at present the eco-labels are not more than a market niche and eco-labels seem so far to be primarily a commercial and marketing tool, rather than an eco-consideration. Some years ago there were lots of "eco-products" offered in the European markets, specially in Germany where the environmentalist movement has been stronger than anywhere else in Europe. There were "eco-jeans", T-shirts made of handpicked cotton only, biodynamic underwear. 

Organically grown cotton is increasingly in demand amongst the importers in the Western world. However, for the time being there is only a very limited amount of organically grown cotton available, i.e. some two percent of the total cotton production.  This means that some major companies, such as Nike, which have already indicated that they will go for the organically grown cotton products in a big way, cannot find the necessary quantities for this purpose. It remains to be seen how organically grown cotton products will actually sell in shops.  Some major retailers, such as Marks & Spencer launched men's shirt collection in organically grown cotton in summer 2000.  The price of these shirts was some 15-20% higher than the price of other cotton shirts, which may not attract many consumers.

ITC has been very much involved with eco-labelling and related matters over the last few years in the area of hard fibres, i.e. specifically jute and sisal. ITC launched a special logo for sisal products in November 1990 in order to project an image around Sisal as a high quality and environment friendly product. Already in the 1980's ITC introduced a new Jute mark for the promotion of jute products in Europe. Geojute products were promoted particularly as an effective, economic and environment friendly solution against soil erosion. More recently ITC conducted in close cooperation with UNDP and the Ministry of Textiles in India a jute promotion project in order to find new end-uses for this fibre through the development of new fabrics, such as jute/cotton, jute/viscose etc. which could be used for a variety of consumer goods, such as travel goods and, even, garments.

In the field of eco-packaging ITC has also been very actively involved in the international fora, even though it may be mentioned that in the textile and clothing sector the questions related to environmentally friendly packaging are not very relevant. Nevertheless, it may be mentioned that different importing countries adopt varying eco-packaging laws and regulations so that the developing country exporters are often have to change their packaging for different markets. It is therefore very important that the exporters of textiles and clothing are aware of the different eco-packaging policies and their trade implications. However, the problems arising from the recycling or disposal of the packaging at the global level have so far very much concentrate in the Western world, the U.S market consuming almost one third of the total packaging materials in the world. The share of the three EU-countries, Germany, the UK and France, is more or less at par with the US.

In February 1999 ITC organised a regional two-day eco-labelling workshop in Bangkok, in close cooperation with ESCAP, Some thirty participants from eleven countries from the ESCAP region - both from the relevant Government offices and textile and clothing industries - were invited to attend the workshop. Participants represented major countries producing/exporting textiles and clothing in the region, i.e., Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Viet Nam.

The workshop generated much interest and subsequently several national seminars were held to disseminate the information received in Bangkok. It is hardly surprising given the importance of the sector to many economies in the region. In 1998 Bangladesh garment exports accounted for almost 75% of the country's foreign exchange earnings and for India and Pakistan the corresponding figures were 35 and 60% respectively. In 1998 China exported textiles and clothing for more than US$ 40 billion, i.e., about one quarter of the total exports of the country. In Sri Lanka the value of garment exports in 1998 was some 46% and in Viet Nam some 20% of the total exports.

In addition to the presentations by the resource persons each participating country had been asked to present a paper about the country's situation vis-à-vis exports of textiles and clothing together with some indications about the relevance of environmental issues within the local industries. Country presentations revealed that awareness vis-à-vis eco-labelling and related matters has clearly improved since June 1995. Many of the participants told the audience about the latest developments in this sector which included the introduction of domestic labels, such as the Environmental Mark in China. Furthermore the Government of India invested significant sums of money for the establishment of a number of certifying laboratories in order to make sure that the German ban on certain AZO-dyes will not cause problems for the exports of textiles and garments from India.

There is no doubt that the environmental matters will continue to have a central role in the future development of international trade in textiles and clothing. There seem to be many open questions to be solved and a much closer global cooperation is called for. In general terms nobody is really arguing against the methods which may lead the world into a cleaner way of living. Yet, many people seem to be surprised that developed countries seem to create rules and regulations without paying too much attention to potential difficulties they may cause in developing countries, if implemented without a closer cooperation with developing country producers/ exporters. This is happening at the same time when international trade in textiles and clothing is supposedly becoming more liberal and transparent, as stipulated by the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing.

One of the open questions, however, is the marketability of the garments. At the end of the day the garments should be sold to consumers. It may be so that the production of man made fibres is more environmentally friendly than the production of natural fibres, such as cotton, which will require the use of pesticides, insecticides and fertilizers. But some consumers may find synthetic fibres irritating to the skin which may make the garment unwearable. It may also be questioned whether an average consumer will be willing to pay a "premium" for an environmentally friendly product if there is a choice of an identical - and most probably cheaper - product which does not carry an eco-label. Perhaps there would be some reason to conduct detailed and objective surveys amongst the consumers about the environmentally friendly products in order to find out whether they are indeed interested in eco-matters - and at which price.