U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements are Wrong Models for the Environment

The Center for International Environmental Law and other signatories argue that the U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore FTAs undermine environmental protection through flawed investment rules and weak environmental provisions. They specifically highlight the failure to meet the 'no greater rights' standard for foreign investors, the absence of a citizen submission process, and the lack of an independent environmental cooperation institution, contrasting these agreements unfavorably with the U.S.-Jordan FTA and NAFTA.

• The U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore FTAs fail to meet the 'no greater rights' standard mandated by the Trade Act of 2002, which requires that foreign investors not receive more substantive rights than U.S. investors under U.S. law. Specifically, the agreements do not ensure that government regulations preventing public nuisances are not considered expropriations, nor do they distinguish between land and personal property as U.S. law does.
• The investment rules in these FTAs may enable foreign investors to challenge domestic environmental regulations, including government decisions on natural resource agreements like Federal oil and gas leases. The authors argue for a general environmental exception similar to the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) to protect non-discriminatory environmental policies.
• The environmental provisions in the Chile and Singapore FTAs are described as ambiguous and inferior to previous agreements. They lack a 'citizen submission process' for alleging failures to enforce environmental laws (a feature of NAFTA) and do not place environmental requirements on the same level as commercial issues (a feature of the U.S.-Jordan FTA).
• The agreements fail to establish an independent environmental cooperation institution or provide specific financial and resource commitments to implement environmental goals. Additionally, the definition of 'environmental laws' in the Chile FTA is considered too ambiguous to guarantee coverage of natural resource issues, which constitute over 40% of Chile's exports.

APA

Porter, S., Waskow, D., Caldwell, J., Seligman, D., Burgiel, S., Frymoyer, B., & Casey-Lefkowitz, S. (2003). U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements are Wrong Models for the Environment. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/news/u-s-chile-and-u-s-singapore-free-trade-agreements-are-wrong-models-for-the-environment/

Chicago

Porter, Stephen, David Waskow, Jake Caldwell, Dan Seligman, Stas Burgiel, Bill Frymoyer, and Susan Casey-Lefkowitz. U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements are Wrong Models for the Environment. Center for International Environmental Law, 2003. https://www.ciel.org/news/u-s-chile-and-u-s-singapore-free-trade-agreements-are-wrong-models-for-the-environment/.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Porter |first1=Stephen |last2=Waskow |first2=David |last3=Caldwell |first3=Jake |last4=Seligman |first4=Dan |last5=Burgiel |first5=Stas |last6=Frymoyer |first6=Bill |last7=Casey-Lefkowitz |first7=Susan |title=U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements are Wrong Models for the Environment |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=1 July 2003 |url=https://www.ciel.org/news/u-s-chile-and-u-s-singapore-free-trade-agreements-are-wrong-models-for-the-environment/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{porter2003uschile, author = {Porter, Stephen and Waskow, David and Caldwell, Jake and Seligman, Dan and Burgiel, Stas and Frymoyer, Bill and Casey-Lefkowitz, Susan}, title = {{U.S.-Chile and U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreements are Wrong Models for the Environment}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2003}, month = jul, url = {https://www.ciel.org/news/u-s-chile-and-u-s-singapore-free-trade-agreements-are-wrong-models-for-the-environment/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }