Tens of thousands of people descended on Seattle, Washington, in December 1999 to protest a World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting of trade ministers from 130 countries around the world that was intended to launch a new, multi-year set of trade liberalization negotiations. At what became known as the "Battle in Seattle," some protestors challenged, in violent street demonstrations, the underlying premise of free trade—namely that the benefits of free trade can be shared by all participants. Some protestors made their point by dressing up as turtles.

A 1998 WTO decision overturning a U.S. law intended to protect sea turtles had become a flash point for concern about the effect that open trade and globalization have on the environment. The decision, known as the "shrimp-turtle case," declared a U.S. import ban on shrimp caught without "turtle excluder devices" was in violation of international trade law.

Although the shrimp import ban was intended to protect the environment, most of the affected imports were from Southeast Asian countries that could not afford the turtle excluder devices. Those countries claimed that the United States ban was therefore protecting the environment by harming their development, since their economies depended on shrimp exports.

The case thus highlighted important and interrelated questions about the place of environmental protection in a globalized economy.

• First, what is the proper balance between environmental protection and economic development?
• Second, how can nations cooperate to protect the environment when their interests diverge?
• Third, what is the role of international organizations in deciding the balance between environmental measures and free trade?
• Fourth, should international agreements on trade and other issues contain explicit measures to protect the environment?
• Finally, what are the responsibilities of richer nations to help poorer nations develop environment-friendly policies?