Does global intervention make for better environmental management? Not necessarily. The ban on international ivory trade to protect the African elephant is a case in point

Japan, once described as an ecological outlaw in a civilised world, faced punishment in March 1991 for its role in endangering the hawksbill sea turtle. The US administration threatened to restrict

Norway, Iceland and Japan have all faced pressures and threats of green embargoes over their demand for whaling quotas. These countries want the right to harvest whales "scientifically",

Opposition to US beef imports began in Europe a few years after health conscious European consumers discovered US beef was hormone treated. When this issue was raised in GATT, the US argued there

The timber industry in tropical countries has aroused disapproval and import bans are increasing on tropical wood from forests that are managed "unsustainably". The disapproval is particularly

Botswana faced international opposition to its plans to develop the Okavango swamps by dredging channels to supply drinking water to the town of Maun and to a nearby diamond mine. Greenpeace

A green war raging at sea is the use of driftnets by fishing fleets. Driftnets have been called "walls of deaths" by conservationists as these immense nets, at times 40 km long, strip mine the

Mexico can't sell its "dolphin unfriendly" tuna to USA. Japan faces punishment for exporting jewellery made of hawksbill sea turtle shell. Malaysia is penalised for exporting rainforest wood. All over the world, green trade wars are raging. But trade ban