WTO Members, Not the Appellate Body, Need to Clarify Boundaries in Renewable Energy Support
What constitutes appropriate state measures for incentivizing renewable energy development and deployment?
This key question has been posed, not only by the sustainable development community, but even more so by governments and investors around the world. On May 6, 2013, all eyes were focused on the Appellate Body (AB) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which gave its first ruling on measures affecting the renewable energy generation sector as part of a dispute brought by Japan and the European Union against Canada (Ontario). However, the AB ruling failed to provide legal clarification and interpretation of WTO rules related to sustainable energy. At the same time, parts of its analysis may have created a broad and potentially problematic carve-out of the subsidy agreement. This commentary analyzes what this ruling meant for the legal status of feed-in tariffs, and argues that WTO members, and not the AB, should clarify boundaries in renewable energy support.
You might also be interested in
Why does the EU want to quit the Energy Charter Treaty?
European lawmakers have backed plans for the EU to exit a treaty that lets fossil fuel firms sue when climate policies hit profits.
EU Parliament agrees to withdraw from Energy Charter Treaty
The bloc's long-mooted withdrawal could halve the number of signatories to a treaty criticized for appearing to protect the interests of fossil fuel investors.
EU votes to leave energy treaty as green rules pushed through
Final plenary session of parliament sees climate legislation passed despite political and industry opposition.
MEPs vote to leave treaty used by investors to sue over climate policies
European lawmakers have voted to escape a treaty that lets investors sue governments in private courts for pursuing policies that stop the planet from heating.