Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Environmental Review

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) submitted a statement to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) arguing that the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) could undermine environmental and public health protections. CIEL expresses concern that 'regulatory coherence' mechanisms and the prioritization of trade impacts over public interest could create a 'chilling effect' on the development of new laws and the implementation of existing ones, particularly regarding toxic chemicals, endocrine disruptors, and nanomaterials.

• CIEL argues that TTIP focuses more on altering how national and regional laws are made than on traditional trade goals like lowering tariffs, as it seeks to reduce 'non-tariff' or 'technical barriers' which are often the laws protecting the environment and public health.
• The proposed 'Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC)' and other coherence procedures could delay regulatory responses to environmental and health threats and facilitate the rollback of existing protections. CIEL warns that these frameworks may prioritize trade impacts over public interest and increase the influence of industry lobbyists.
• There is a significant regulatory divergence between the U.S. and EU regarding toxic chemicals. CIEL contends that the USTR views stronger EU protections as 'technical barriers to trade' and fears that TTIP could be used to limit progressive chemical safety policies in both the EU and U.S. states.
• CIEL highlights risks that TTIP could impede the ability of U.S. states and EU member states to innovate and implement stronger environmental standards, especially given the history of federal inaction in the U.S. on industrial chemicals.
• The document identifies a conflict in how risk assessments and information are handled: the EU relies more on industry-generated data (with a reported 69% non-compliance rate in some checks), while U.S. law allows public access to complete health and safety studies. CIEL warns that harmonizing confidential business information criteria could restrict the 'right to know'.
• CIEL expresses concern over the U.S. government's interference in EU efforts to regulate endocrine disruptors and nanomaterials. It notes that the USTR's 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade describes aspects of the EU's REACH regulation as discriminatory and lacking a legitimate rationale.
• The use of 'harmonization, mutual recognition, and equivalence' is criticized as potentially leading to a 'lowest-common denominator' approach. For example, mutual recognition in the cosmetics sector could allow products prohibited in one market to enter the other.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2014). Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Environmental Review. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/TTIP_Comments_2Sep2014.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Environmental Review. 2014. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/TTIP_Comments_2Sep2014.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Environmental Review |date=2 September 2014 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/TTIP_Comments_2Sep2014.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2014transatlantic, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Environmental Review}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2014}, month = sep, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/TTIP_Comments_2Sep2014.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }