在八○年代中期之後，各個國際環境公學為了吸引更多的國家成為締約國，並協助締約國履行公約的義務，開始設計不同的機制，例如與環境保護有關的貿易管制措施，以及就公約所管制的事項限制與非締約國之間的貿易。針對這些以環保為目的的貿易手段與世貿組織所規範的義務是否相容，環保人士與自由貿易人士在國際展開了激烈的辯論。臺灣即將成為世貿組織的會員國；但另一方面，由於其特殊的國際地位，臺灣並無法成為大多數的國際環境公約之締約國。因此，在一些以限制與非締約國之間的貿易為誘因來吸引國家公約的國際環境公約之下，臺灣的處境額外的不利。當臺灣加入世界貿易組織之後，是否會針對該些環境公約所規定的環保相關貿易措施，向爭端解決小組提起控訴？本文即嘗試者探應臺灣在環保與貿易的辯論之中應如何自我定位的問題。

　　　　　Since the mid 1980s, multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) began to design novel mechanisms such as trade-related environmental measures (TREMs) and trade restriction against non-Parties in order to attract wider membership as well as assisting the implementation of treaty obligations. Keen debate arose as a result between environmentalists and freee traders with regard to the compatibility of these TREMs with obligations under the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Taiwan becomes a Member of the WTO in 2002, whilst it is not a Party to any major MEA due to its status under international law. The circumstances put Taiwan in a very difficult position vis-a-vis those MEAs adopting trade restriction against non-Party as a means to attract wider membership. Will Taiwan bring complaints to the Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO when confronted with TREMs authorized by MEAs? This article seeks to find out the position the government might adopt in the international debate of free trade versus environmental protection.