Recently negotiated linkages between trade and environmental agreements have the potential to enhance environmental regime effectiveness in ways that have been impossible under environmental treaties alone. Specifically, the 2009 U.S.—Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) contains the most prescriptive environmental directives found in any U.S. trade agreement to date and pioneering provisions linking environmental treaty implementation to the TPA’s much stronger dispute-settlement procedures. The combination of these two elements has begun to catalyze Peru’s implementation of relevant environmental provisions and a corresponding potential for regime effectiveness improvements. Simultaneously, these prescriptive provisions contributed to catastrophic social unrest in Peru that must be acknowledged and addressed by policy makers in the United States and abroad before this agreement is exported to other countries.
Amazon Watch. (2010). Declaration about the consultation process in Peru around the forestry law. Retrieved from http://amazonwatch.org/news/2010/1213-declaration-about-the-consultation-process-in-peru-around-the-forestry-law
2.
Associated Press. (2009, June 7). Peru protest violence kills 22 police. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/07/peru-violence
3.
Axelrod, R., & Keohane, R.O. ( 1985). Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions . World Politics, 38, 226-254.
4.
Bank Information Center. (2010). Peru: Statement by AIDESEP on the rights and consultation of indigenous peoples . Retrieved from http://www.bicusa.org/en/Article.12220.aspx
5.
Barandiarán, G.A. ( 2008). Environmental governance in legislative decrees of the implementation of the FTA Peru-EE.UU. Retrieved from http://www.landcoalition.org/sites/default/files/publication/719/RedGE_BARANDIARAN_Environmental.pdf
6.
Barrett, S. ( 1997). The strategy of trade sanctions in international environmental agreements. Resource and Energy Economics, 19, 345-361.
7.
Beck, M. ( 2010). Chairman Levin, ways and means members respond to Obama administration announcement on Peru. Retrieved from http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=11314
Blundell, A.G., & Rodan, B.D. ( 2003). Mahogany and CITES: Moving beyond the veneer of legality . Oryx, 37(1), 85-90.
10.
Brevetti, R. ( 2009). Despite Democrats Objections, Bush says U.S.-Peru FTA to Go into Force February 1. International Trade Daily . January 21, 2009.
11.
Buitron, X., & Mulliken, T. ( 1997). CITES Appendix III and the trade in big-leafed Mahogany (A TRAFFIC Network Report). Cambridge, UK: TRAFFIC International. Retrieved from http://www.traffic.org/forestry-reports/traffic_pub_forestry22.pdf
12.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 1994). Summary Report of the Committee I meeting. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
13.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 1997). Summary Report of the Committee I Meeting at 10th Conference of the Parties. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
14.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2000). Summary Report of the Committee I Meeting at the 11th Conference of the Parties. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
15.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2005a). Summary Record of the 15th Meeting of the CITES Plants Committee. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
16.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2005b). Summary Record of the 17th Meeting of the CITES Plants Committee. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
17.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2007). Summary Record of the 55th Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. The Hague, Netherlands: CITES Secretariat.
18.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2008a). Interpretation and implementation of the Convention. Species trade and conservation. Bigleaf mahogany. Geneva , Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
19.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. ( 2008b). Summary record of the 57th meeting of the Standing Committee of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
20.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Trade Database. (n.d.). Peru exports of Swietenia macrophylla and Cedrela odorata, 1996-2010. Retrieved from http://www.unep-wcmc.org/citestrade/novice.cfm
21.
Del Gatto, F., Ortiz-von Halle, B., Buendía, B., & Keong, C.H. ( 2009). Trade liberalization and forest verification: Learning from the US-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. Retrieved from http://www.verifor.org/RESOURCES/briefing-papers/9-perutradeliberalisation.pdf
22.
Esty, D. & Deere, C. ( 2002). Greening the Americas: NAFTA’s Lessons for Hemispheric Trade. Cambridge: MIT Press
23.
Environmental Investigation Agency. (2010, May). Peru’s forest sector: Ready for the new international landscape? Retrieved from http://www.eia-global.org/PDF/Report-Peru-Forest-May10-ENG.pdf
24.
Finer, M., and M. Orta-Martinez . (2010) A second hydrocarbon boom threatens the Peruvian Amazon: trends, projections, and policy implications . Environmental Research Letters (5):014012.
25.
Gehring, T., & Oberthür, S. (2009). The causal mechanisms of interaction between international institutions. European Journal of International Relations, 15, 125-156.
26.
Grogan, J., & Barreto, P. ( 2005). Big-leaf mahogany on CITES Appendix II: Big challenge, big opportunity. Conservation Biology, 19, 973-976.
27.
Gullison, R.E., Rice, R.E., & Blundell, A.G. (2000). "Marketing" species conservation: Financial incentives can be found to conserve a species threatened by trade . Nature, 404, 923-924.
28.
Haas, E.B. ( 1980, April). Why collaborate? Issue-linkage and international regimes. World Politics, 32, 357-405.
29.
Inside U.S. Trade. (2010a, November 19). U.S. presses Peru to approve controversial forestry law by mid-December . Inside U.S. Trade, 28(45). Retrieved from http://wtonewsstand.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-11/19/2010/menu-id-445.html
30.
Inside U.S. Trade. (2010b, December 24). U.S. "monitoring situation" after Peru fails to act on new forestry law. Inside U.S. Trade, 28(50). Retrieved from https://wtonewsstand.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-12/24/2010/menu-id-445.html
31.
Inside U.S. Trade. (2011, February 7). U.S. envoy expects Peru to pass FTA-linked forestry law around April. Inside U.S. Trade, 29(6). Retrieved from https://wtonewsstand.com/InsideUS-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-02/11/2011/menu-id-445.html
32.
Jinnah, S. ( 2003). Emissions trading under the Kyoto Protocol: NAFTA and WTO concerns. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review , 15, 709-761.
33.
Jinnah, S. ( 2010). Overlap management in the World Trade Organization: Secretariat influence on trade-environment politics. Global Environmental Politics, 10, 64-79.
34.
Jinnah, S., & Kennedy, J. ( 2011). A new era of trade-environment politics: Learning from US leadership and its consequences abroad. Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations. Forthcoming.
35.
Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. ( 1998). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
36.
Kometter, R.F., Martinez, M., Blundell, A.G., Gullison, R.E., Steininger, M.K., & Rice, R.E. ( 2004). Impacts of unsustainable mahogany logging in Bolivia and Peru. Ecology and Society9(1), 12-31.
37.
Lynch, D. ( 2007). Trade deal with Peru passes through House. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=3841424&page=1
38.
McArthur, T., & Tucker, T. ( 2010, February 1). A year after implementation of Peru free trade agreement, U.S. and Peru left with broken promises and no new trade model. Retrieved from http://citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade/2010/02/a-year-after-implementation-of-peru-free-trade-agreement-us-and-peru-left-with-broken-promises-no-new-trade-model.html
39.
Mejía, E., Buitrón, X., Peña-Claros, M., & Grogan, J. ( 2008). Bigleaf mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) in Peru, Bolivia and Brazil. Geneva, Switzerland: CITES Secretariat.
40.
Mitchell, R. ( 1994). Regime design matters: International oil pollution and treaty compliance. International Organization, 48, 425-458.
41.
Natural Resources Defense Council. (2006). If you don’t buy African ivory why do you buy Peruvian mahogany?Washington, DC: National Research Development Corporation .
42.
Natural Resources Defense Council and Defenders of Wildlife. (2006). Preliminary assessment of trade in bigleaf mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla). Washington, DC: National Research Development Corporation and Defenders of Wildlife.
43.
Neumayer, E. ( 2001). How regime theory and economic theory of international environmental cooperation can learn from each other. Global Environmental Politics, 1, 122-147.
44.
Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (Eds.). (2006). Institutional interaction in global environmental governance: Synergy and conflict among international and EU policies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45.
Peru. (2001). Informe national. grupo de trabajo sobre la caoba [National report: Working group on Mahogany]. Working Group on Mahogany: Santa Cruz, Bolivia.
46.
Peru. (2008). Law 29157 Peru-United States of America. Retrieved from http://www.glin.gov/view.action?glinID=205969
47.
Post, J., & Snel, M. ( 2003). The impact of decentralized forest management on charcoal production practices in eastern Senegal. Geoforum, 34(1), 85-98.
48.
Ribot, J.C. ( 2008). Building local democracy through natural resource interventions: An environmentalist’s responsibility (A Policy Brief). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
49.
Ribot, J.C., Agrawal, A., & Larson, A.M. ( 2006). Recentralizing while decentralizing: How national governments reappropriate forest resources. World Development, 34, 1864-1886.
50.
Rosendal, K.G. ( 2001). Impacts of overlapping regimes: The case of biodiversity . Global Governance, 7(1), 95-117.
51.
Selin, H., & VanDeveer, S.D. (2004). Mapping institutional linkages in air politics. Global Environmental Politics, 3(3), 14-36.
52.
Shaffer, G. ( 2002). The nexus of law and politics: The WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment. In R. H. Steinberg (Ed.), The greening of trade law: International Trade Organizations and environmental issues. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
53.
Soroos, M. ( 2005). Global institutions and the environment: An evolutionary perspective. In R. Axelrod, D. Downie, & N. Vig (Eds.), The global environment: Institutions, law and policy . (pp. 21-42). Washington DC: CQ Press.
54.
Steinberg, P.F. ( 2003). Understanding political change in developing countries: The spheres of influence framework. Global Environmental Politics , 3(1), 11-32.
55.
Susskind, L.E. ( 1994). Environmental diplomacy: Negotiating more effective global environmental agreements. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
56.
Tollison, R.D., & Willett, T.D. ( 1979). An economic theory of mutually advantageous issue linkages in international negotiations. International Organization , 33, 425-449.
57.
TRAFFIC International. (2001). CITES Appendix III implementation for big-leafed mahogany Swietenia macrophylla . Cambridge, UK: Author.
58.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2009). U.S. trade in bigleaf mahogany: 1996-2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior.
59.
Office of the United States Trade Representative. ( 2010, July 30). Statement by Ambassador Ron Kirk on the annex on forest sector governance of the United States-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA). Retrieved from http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2010/july/statement-ambassador-ron-kirk-annex-forest-sector-gov
60.
Weiss, E.B., & Jacobson, H.K. (1998). Engaging countries: Strengthening compliance with international environmental accords. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61.
Wold, C. ( 2008). Evaluating NAFTA and the Commission for Environmental Cooperation: Lesson for integrating trade and environment in free trade agreements . St. Louis University Public Law Review, 28, 201-252.
62.
Youatt, A. ( 2009). REDD: Peru-Ving REDD: Lessons from Peru for combating deforestation. Washington, DC: NRDC. Retrieved from http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ayouatt/peruving_redd.html
63.
Young, O. ( 1994). The effectiveness of international governance systems . In International governance: Protecting the environment in a stateless society (pp. 12-32). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
64.
Young, O. ( 2002). The institutional dimensions of global change: Fit, interplay and scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
