Trade measures and positive measures must be evaluated within the context of the MEA in which they are found. Their raison d’etre is to advance the objectives of the overall regime; therefore, their success or failure must ultimately be measured by their tendency to advance or inhibit the purposes for which the regime as a whole has been established. An analysis of the effectiveness of these measures, therefore, should begin by identifying the objectives of the MEA, in this case to protect the ozone layer and the human health and global environment which depend upon the ozone layer. The analysis should end by demonstrating the degree to which the trade and positive measure provisions have advanced or inhibited the achievement of those objectives.
The effectiveness of the trade measures of the Protocol, however, cannot be judged solely by looking for the achievement of the broad objectives of the Protocol. The drafters of the Protocol designed these measures to operate as key links in a causal chain that would eventually result in the achievement of the Protocol’s final objectives. Once the broad objectives of the regime have been identified, the analysis should identify the role of the trade and positive measures in the achievement of those broader objectives. What, incremental advances were the trade and positive measures intended to make? Why were they included in the regime? The product of this second analytical step should be a list of the narrow, objectives of the trade and positive measures. The narrow objectives are intermediary: their achievement should advance the broad objectives of the regime as a whole.