Thumbnail Image

Potential conflicts between agricultural trade rules and climate change treaty commitments.

The State of Agricultural Commodity Markets (SOCO) 2018: Background paper

Year of publication 2018

Place of publication Rome, Italy ;

Pages 50

Author Häberli, C.

Publisher FAO ;

Product type Book (stand-alone)

ISBN 978-92-5-131104-2

Edition 1

Synopsis (short abstract) Climate change – among its many other challenges – also affects the conditions of competition along the whole food value chain. This article posits that many mitigation and adaptation policies imply a differentiation between otherwise identical products but with different carbon footprints. Where imports are affected, there is a potential for trade frictions. The main issue appears to be a climate-smart treatment of like products with different (non-product-related) production and processing methods (ppm). Now that national governments start implementing their commitments under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, they have to closely look at the trade and investment impact of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The NDCs presently available remain silent on concrete measures involving product differentiation according to footprint differences, be it by way of border adjustment measures, subsidies, prohibitions, or restrictions. The non-discrimination principle enshrined in the multilateral trading system can be a problem for such differentiations. No climate-smart agricultural measures have yet been notified to the World Trade Organization (WTO). But several renewable energy programmes have been found to violate WTO rules. Potential problems could arise, for instance, from differentiating tariffs, import restrictions or taxes according to carbon footprint. Conditions of competition might even be affected by labels signalling products with a bigger (or a “climate-friendly”) footprint, or through subsidies and incentives compensating domestic producers subject to emissions reductions, prohibitions, and input restrictions. A second major problem lies in the way the Paris Agreement and the WTO address the Development Dimension. In the Paris Agreement, the Development Dimension is addressed by the notion of Common but Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR), leaving Parties free in terms of how they take development into account in their NDCs. On the other side, the Special and Differentiated Treatment (SDT) foreseen in all WTO agreements for developing country products and services appears incapable of dealing with the global impact of all emissions, regardless of their origin, or with the negative impact on developing country exports to climate-smart markets in developed countries. In conclusion, we suggest that a review of the climate-relevant trade and investment rules is necessary at the international level, involving climate, and agriculture and trade regulators, supported by scientific, economic and legal expertise. The purpose of this review is to avoid litigation jeopardising the implementation of the Paris Agreement. At the same time, such a review must be comprehensive, because the objective is to ensure maximum policy space for climate mitigation and adaptation without negatively affecting other countries, or unduly restricting trade and investment, especially in poor developing countries. Last but not least, this intergovernmental and inter-institutional review is urgent, because the results should provide as quickly as possible the legal security necessary for investors and operators, regulators, NDC developments and reviews, and international standard-setting processes.

Language English

Also available in:
No results found.

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Climate Change and Food Systems: Global assessments and implications for food security and trade 2015
    Also available in:
    No results found.
    This book collects the findings of a group of scientists and economists who have taken stock of climate change impacts on food and agriculture at global and regional levels over the past two decades. The evidence presented describes how global warming will impact where and how food is produced and discusses the significant consequences for food security, health and nutrition, water scarcity and climate adaptation. The book also highlights the implications for global food trade. The evidence pres ented in the book is presented in a way that is widely accessible to policy decision makers and practitioners and makes a distinct contribution towards a greater science-policy interchange. Put together, the different analyses in the book paint a comprehensive perspective linking climate change to food, nutrition, water, and trade along with suggested policy responses.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Border and related measures in the context of adaptation and mitigation to climate change
    The State of Agricultural Commodity Markets (SOCO): Background paper
    2018
    Also available in:
    No results found.
    Although international trade is not specifically mentioned in the Paris Climate Agreement, trade can play a facilitating role in achieving the mitigation and adaptation objectives of signatories to the Agreement. Trade policies can also undermine those objectives. The focus of this paper is on examining how the facilitating role of trade can be achieved. One of the challenges created by the ‘bottom-up’ approach of self-declared national mitigation targets adopted in the Agreement is that if the economic costs of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are internalized in production and consumption, the implicit price of carbon will differ across countries. This creates the potential for trade distortions. Domestic mitigation policies in importers will almost inevitably result in some carbon leakage, i.e. offsets to reductions in domestic emissions through additional emissions generated in supplying imports. But an important distinction needs to be made between carbon reallocation and carbon misallocation resulting from changes in trade volumes. In the reallocation case, trade leads to a shift in production to lower-emitting producers thereby contributing to global mitigation. In the misallocation case, the opposite occurs. This paper analyses how various border measures, including border tax adjustments (BTAs) might be used to reduce potential carbon misallocation. The conclusion is that technical and legal constraints on the effective application of border measures for food and agricultural products to prevent carbon misallocation are extremely challenging and their use could open the door to protectionism. The use of carbon standards and labelling offers an alternative approach to reducing misallocation and promoting reallocation. It poses fewer technical difficulties and reduces the potential for legal challenges. An added advantage of labelling is that it can help to promote changes in consumption that will be needed to reduce the carbon footprint of food and agriculture. The use of the approach could be facilitated through the adoption of international standards for carbon measurement and labelling, such as those being developed through the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Labelling is not a panacea and may have limited effectiveness when consumers base their consumption decisions primarily on the basis of price. For this reason, the use of domestic policy measures that increase carbon efficiency in agriculture (reduce emissions per unit of output) and limit changes in land use that contribute to emissions will also be important for achieving mitigation aims under the Paris Agreement. An increasing number of regional trade agreements (RTAs) have incorporated environmental provisions, with the most common types of provisions focusing on environmental cooperation. Recent agreements recognise the importance of mutually supportive trade and environmental policies, and national commitments to multinational environmental agreements. RTAs could play a supporting role to the Paris Climate Agreement, by fostering international cooperation on climate mitigation measures in the context of freer trade.
Show more

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.