IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2015-69.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade in Environmental Goods: A Review of the WTO Appellate Body’s Ruling in US — Countervailing Measures (China)

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Brewster
  • Claire Brunel
  • Anna Maria Mayda

Abstract

In this paper we claim that, in the WTO Appellate Body (AB)’s ruling in US — Countervailing Measures (China), the AB decision has not put in question the practice of imposing countervailing duties (CVDs). While the US has formally “lost” the case, a change in the procedures and tests used to motivate the CVD will allow the US to continue using this policy tool on the specified products. From an economic point of view, this is not welcome news since CVDs have the standard distortionary effects of tariffs and could go against environmental goals. From a political-economy point of view, the CVDs in this case appear driven by pressure of domestic manufacturers of clean energy technology and products.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Brewster & Claire Brunel & Anna Maria Mayda, 2015. "Trade in Environmental Goods: A Review of the WTO Appellate Body’s Ruling in US — Countervailing Measures (China)," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/69, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2015/69
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/37155/RSCAS_2015_69.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/37155
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gavin Goh & Andreas R. Ziegler, 2003. "Retrospective Remedies in the WTO after Automotive Leather," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 545-564, September.
    2. Collie, David, 1991. "Export subsidies and countervailing tariffs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3-4), pages 309-324, November.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    4. Dixit, Avinash K, 1989. "Entry and Exit Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(3), pages 620-638, June.
    5. Rodney D. Ludema & Anna Maria Mayda, 2013. "Do terms-of-trade effects matter for trade agreements? Theory and evidence from WTO Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1837-1893.
    6. Wang, Zhongying & Qin, Haiyan & Lewis, Joanna I., 2012. "China's wind power industry: Policy support, technological achievements, and emerging challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 80-88.
    7. Katherine Baylis, 2007. "Unfair Subsidies and Countervailing Duties," Chapters, in: William A. Kerr & James D. Gaisford (ed.), Handbook on International Trade Policy, chapter 33, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Joanna I. Lewis, 2014. "The Rise of Renewable Energy Protectionism: Emerging Trade Conflicts and Implications for Low Carbon Development," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 14(4), pages 10-35, November.
    9. Aaron Cosbey & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2014. "A Turquoise Mess: Green Subsidies, Blue Industrial Policy and Renewable Energy: The Case for Redrafting the Subsidies Agreement of the WTO," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 11-47.
    10. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    11. Schwartz, Warren F & Sykes, Alan O, 2002. "The Economic Structure of Renegotiation and Dispute Resolution in the World Trade Organization," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 179-204, January.
    12. Aaron Cosbey & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2014. "A Turquoise Mess: Green Subsidies, Blue Industrial Policy and Renewable Energy: the Case for Redrafting the Subsidies Agreement of the WTO," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/17, European University Institute.
    13. Haley, Usha C.V. & Haley, George T., 2013. "Subsidies to Chinese Industry: State Capitalism, Business Strategy, and Trade Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199773749.
    14. Petros C. Mavroidis, 2014. "A Turquoise Mess: Green Subsidies, Blue Industrial Policy and Renewable Energy: the Case for Redrafting the Subsidies Agreement of the WTO," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers p0368, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Swati Dhingra & Timothy Meyer, 2021. "Leveling the Playing Field: Industrial Policy and Export-Contingent Subsidies in India-Export Measures," RSCAS Working Papers 2021/15, European University Institute.
    2. Bown, Chad & Crowley, Meredith A., 2016. "The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 11216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carolyn Fischer, 2017. "Environmental Protection for Sale: Strategic Green Industrial Policy and Climate Finance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(3), pages 553-575, March.
    2. Thijs Van de Graaf & Harro van Asselt, 2017. "Introduction to the special issue: energy subsidies at the intersection of climate, energy, and trade governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 313-326, June.
    3. Bernard Hoekman & Douglas Nelson, 2020. "Rethinking international subsidy rules," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 3104-3132, December.
    4. Fischer, Carolyn & Greaker, Mads & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2017. "Robust technology policy against emission leakage: The case of upstream subsidies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 44-61.
    5. Dirk Bièvre & Ilaria Espa & Arlo Poletti, 2017. "No iceberg in sight: on the absence of WTO disputes challenging fossil fuel subsidies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 411-425, June.
    6. Charnovitz, Steve & Fischer, Carolyn, 2015. "Canada–Renewable Energy: Implications for WTO Law on Green and Not-So-Green Subsidies," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 177-210, April.
    7. Carolyn Fischer & Mads Greaker & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2014. "Robust Policies against Emission Leakage: The Case for Upstream Subsidies," CESifo Working Paper Series 4742, CESifo.
    8. Bougette, Patrice & Charlier, Christophe, 2015. "Renewable energy, subsidies, and the WTO: Where has the ‘green’ gone?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 407-416.
    9. Bernard M Hoekman & Petros C Mavroidis & Sunayana Sasmal, 2023. "Managing Externalities in the WTO: The Agreement On Fisheries Subsidies," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 266-284.
    10. Solleder, Jean-Marc, 2020. "Market power and export taxes," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    11. Nelson, Douglas & Puccio, Laura, 2021. "Nihil novi sub sole: The Need for Rethinking WTO and Green Subsidies in Light of United States – Renewable Energy," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 491-508, October.
    12. Dani Rodrik, 1993. "Taking Trade Policy Seriously: Export Subsidization as a Case Study in Policy Effectiveness," NBER Working Papers 4567, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    14. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Sang-Kee Kim & Young-Han Kim, 2020. "Welfare implications of upstream subsidy in the presence of countervailing duties under limited verifiability," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(3), pages 643-663, June.
    16. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    17. Fabrice Defever & Alejandro Riaño, 2017. "China’s Dual Export Sector," Discussion Papers 2017-01, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    18. Ahmad Bathaei & Dalia Štreimikienė, 2023. "Renewable Energy and Sustainable Agriculture: Review of Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-24, September.
    19. Sturm, Daniel & Ulph, Alistair, 2002. "Environment, trade, political economy and imperfect information: a survey," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0204, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    20. Qianqian Shao & Thorsten Janus & Maarten J. Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2018. "The Conservation Effects of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Biased Policymakers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental goods; countervailing duties; WTO.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2015/69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.