The Discrepancy Between Environmental and Trade Commitments: Is a Green Countervailing Duty War Looming?

Abstract

This article examines the problematic interaction between two branches of public international law, namely, international environmental law and trade law, focusing on the growing tension between environmental commitments and the current World Trade Organization ("WTO") subsidy framework in the context of the green transition. It analyzes whether the existing WTO system was designed to accommodate and is capable of supporting comprehensive green subsidies that are increasingly adopted by states as part of their green industrial policies. Using a doctrinal, jurisprudential, and policy-based analysis of WTO subsidy rules, the article finds that the current WTO framework provides limited legal space and significant legal uncertainty for large-scale green subsidies. It further observes that this misalignment unfolds at a time when the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, which would normally provide multilateral remedies, remains dysfunctional due to the absence of a functioning Appellate Body. In this context, unilateral measures, i.e., countervailing duties ("CVDs"), are increasingly seen as the primary recourse, further intensifying trade tensions and potentially leading to an undesirable green CVD war. This article contributes to the literature by illustrating how the interaction between green industrial policies, WTO subsidy disciplines, and trade remedies generates new forms of conflict within the multilateral trading system, with significant implications for both environmental policy objectives and the stability of international trade relations.

Keywords

• World Trade Organization
• Paris Climate Agreement
• Green Subsidies
• SCM Agreement
• Protectionism
• Subsidy War
• CVD War

Çevresel ve Ticari Taahhütler Arasındaki Uyumsuzluk: Yeşil Telafi Edici Vergi Savaşı Yaklaşıyor mu?

Abstract

Bu makale, yeşil dönüşüm sürecinde devletlerin çevresel taahhütleri ile mevcut Dünya Ticaret Örgütü ("DTÖ") sübvansiyon kuraları arasında giderek artan gerilim bağlamında, uluslararası kamu hukukunun iki dalı olan uluslararası çevre hukuku ile uluslararası ticaret hukuku arasındaki sorunlu etkileşimi incelemektedir. Çalışma, devletler tarafından yeşil sanayi politikalarının temel araçlarından biri haline gelen yeşil sübvansiyonların, mevcut DTÖ sistemine uygun olup olmadığını analiz etmektedir. DTÖ sübvansiyon kurallarına ilişkin doktrinel, yargısal içtihatlara dayalı ve politika temelli bir inceleme neticesinde, mevcut hukuki çerçevenin büyük ölçekli yeşil sübvansiyon paketleri bakımından sınırlı bir alan sunduğu ve önemli ölçüde hukuki belirsizlik barındırdığı ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu yapısal uyumsuzluğun DTÖ bünyesinde yer alan Anlaşmazlıkların Halli Organında çözümlenmesi gerekirken, Temyiz Organı'na hâkim atanmaması nedeniyle fiilen bu seçeneğin işlevsiz hale geldiği bir dönemde ortaya çıktığı görülmektedir. Makale, bu durumun tek taraflı önlemlerden biri olan telafi edici vergileri ("TEV") temel başvuru yolu hâline getirdiğini; bu hususun ise ticaret gerilimlerini daha da yoğunlaştırarak istenmeyen bir yeşil TEV savaşı ihtimalini güçlendirdiğini iddia etmektedir. Bu yönüyle çalışma, yeşil sanayi politikaları, DTÖ sübvansiyon disiplinleri ve ticaret hukuku araçları arasındaki etkileşimin, çok taraflı ticaret sistemi içinde yeni çatışma biçimleri oluşturacağını ortaya koyarak; bu çatışmaların uluslararası ticari ilişkilerin istikrarı ve devletlerin çevre politikası hedefleri bakımından doğurduğu önemli sonuçlar üzerinden literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

• Dünya Ticaret Örgütü
• Paris İklim Anlaşması
• Yeşil Sübvansiyonlar
• Sübvansiyonlar ve Telafi Edici Önlemler Anlaşması
• Korumacılık
• Sübvansiyon Savaşı
• Telafi Edici Vergiler Savaşı

References

1. Aiginger K and Rodrik D, ‘Rebirth of Industrial Policy and an Agenda for the Twenty-First Century’ (2020) 20(2) Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade 189-207. google scholar
2. Akman S and others, ‘Reforming the WTO through Inclusive and Development-Friendly Plurilaterals’ (2023) 57(6) Journal of World Trade 875–888. google scholar
3. Amir-ud-Din R and Zaman A, ‘Failures of the “Invisible Hand”’ (2016) 45(1) Forum for Social Economics 41-60. google scholar
4. Asmelash H, ‘The First Ten Years of WTO Jurisprudence on Renewable Energy Support Measures: Has the Dust Settled Yet?’ (2022) 21(4) World Trade Review 455-478. google scholar
5. ——, ‘The WTO Dispute Settlement System as a Forum for Climate Litigation?’ (2023) 32(2) Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law 321-333. google scholar
6. Asmelash HB, ‘Energy Subsidies and WTO Dispute Settlement: Why Only Renewable Energy Subsidies Are Challenged’ (2015) 18(2) Journal of International Economic Law 261-285. google scholar
7. ——, ‘The Regulation of Energy Subsidies in the WTO: Bridge or Bottleneck for Sustainable Energy Transition?’ (PhD Dissertation, Bocconi University 2019). google scholar
8. Baker S H, ‘Climate Change and International Economic Law’ (2016) 43(1) Ecology Law Quarterly 53-106. google scholar

9. Bhala R, Dictionary of International Trade Law (LexisNexis 2008). google scholar
10. Branger F and Quirion P, ‘Climate Policy and the “Carbon Haven” Effect’ (2014) 5(1) WIREs Climate Change 53-71. google scholar
11. Charnovitz S and Fischer C, ‘Canada–Renewable Energy: Implications for WTO Law on Green and Not-So-Green Subsidies’ (2015) 14(2) World Trade Review 177-210. google scholar
12. Coppens D, WTO Disciplines on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures: Balancing Policy Space and Legal Constraints (Cambridge University Press 2014). google scholar
13. Colares J F and Durmuş M T, Restructuring Trade Agreements (Wolters Kluwer 2021). google scholar
14. Cosbey A and Mavroidis P C, ‘A Turquoise Mess: Green Subsidies, Blue Industrial Policy and Renewable Energy: The Case for Redrafting the Subsidies Agreement of the WTO’ (2014) 17(1) Journal of International Economic Law 11-47. google scholar
15. Di Leva C E and Shi X, ‘The Paris Agreement and the International Trade Regime: Considerations for Harmonization’ (2017) 17(1) Sustainable Development Law & Policy 20-33. google scholar
16. Droege S and others, ‘The Trade System and Climate Action: Ways Forward under the Paris Agreement’ (2017) 13(2) South Carolina Journal of International Law & Business 195-277. google scholar
17. Eliason A, ‘Using the WTO to Facilitate the Paris Agreement: A Tripartite Approach’ (2019) 52(3) Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 545-575. google scholar
18. Espa I and Marín Durán G, ‘Renewable Energy Subsidies and WTO Law: Time to Rethink the Case for Reform Beyond Canada – Renewable Energy/Fit Program’ (2018) 21(3) Journal of International Economic Law 621-653. google scholar
19. Green A, ‘Trade Rules and Climate Change Subsidies’ (2006) 5(3) World Trade Review 377-414. google scholar
20. Gulotty R, ‘WTO Subsidy Disciplines’ (2022) 21(3) World Trade Review 330-341. google scholar
21. Horlick G and Clarke P A, ‘Rethinking Subsidy Disciplines for the Future: Policy Options for Reform’ (2017) 20(3) Journal of International Economic Law 673-703. google scholar
22. Howse R, ‘Making the WTO (Not So) Great Again: The Case Against Responding to the Trump Trade Agenda Through Reform of WTO Rules on Subsidies and State Enterprises’ (2020) 23(2) Journal of International Economic Law 371-389. google scholar
23. ——, ‘The Limits of the WTO’ (2022) 116 American Journal of International Law Unbound 41-45. google scholar
24. Howse R and Langille J, ‘Continuity and Change in the World Trade Organization: Pluralism Past, Present, and Future’ (2023) 117(1) American Journal of International Law 1-47. google scholar
25. International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2024 (International Energy Agency 2024). google scholar
26. Kleimann D and others, ‘Green Tech Race? The US Inflation Reduction Act and the EU Net Zero Industry Act’ (2023) 46(12) The World Economy 3420-3434. google scholar
27. Leal-Arcas R and others, ‘The World Trade Organization and Carbon Market Clubs’ (2021) 52(4) Georgetown Journal of International Law 895-976. google scholar
28. Lee H, ‘The Presumption of Conformity for Climate Measures: Reconciling the Climate Change Regime and the WTO’ (2022) 17(2) Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy 449-481. google scholar
29. Lennan M and Switzer S, ‘Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies’ (2023) 38(1) International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 161-177. google scholar
30. Li Z and others, ‘Environmental Taxes, Green Subsidies, and Cleaner Production Willingness: Evidence from China’s Publicly Traded Companies’ (2022) 183 Technological Forecasting and Social Change 1-13. google scholar
31. Low P, ‘The WTO in Crisis: Closing the Gap between Conversation and Action or Shutting Down the Conversation?’ (2022) 21(3) World Trade Review 1-17. google scholar
32. Mavroidis P and Sapir A, ‘China in the WTO Twenty Years On: How to Mend a Broken Relationship?’ (2023) 24(1) German Law Journal 227-242. google scholar
33. Nelson D and Puccio L, ‘Nihil Novi Sub Sole: The Need for Rethinking WTO and Green Subsidies in Light of United States – Renewable Energy’ (2021) 20(4) World Trade Review 491-508. google scholar
34. Pauwelyn J, ‘WTO Dispute Settlement Post 2019: What to Expect?’ (2019) 22(3) Journal of International Economic Law 297-321. google scholar
35. Prazeres T L, ‘Trade and National Security: Rising Risks for the WTO’ (2020) 19(1) World Trade Review 137-148. google scholar
36. Rodrik D, ‘Green Industrial Policy’ (2014) 30(3) Oxford Review of Economic Policy 469-491. google scholar
37. Rubini L, ‘Ain’t Wastin’ Time No More: Subsidies for Renewable Energy, The SCM Agreement, Policy Space, and Law Reform’ (2012) 15(2) Journal of International Economic Law 525-579. google scholar
38. ——, ‘’The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.‘ Lessons on Methodology in Legal Analysis from the Recent WTO Litigation on Renewable Energy Subsidies’ (2014) 48(5) Journal of World Trade 895-938. google scholar
39. Sakr R L, ‘Beyond History and Boundaries: Rethinking the Past in the Present of International Economic Law’ (2019) 22(1) Journal of International Economic Law 57-91. google scholar
40. Sarıbeyoğlu Skalar M, ‘COVID-19 ve Aşının Adil Dağıtımı: Dünya Ticaret Örgütü Anlaşmaları Bağlamında Ortaya Çıkan Sorunlar’ (2021) 41(2) Public and Private International Law Bulletin 395-419. google scholar
41. Shukla A, ‘The Future of Trade and Environment: A Roadmap for Reconciling Two Competing Goals’ (2024) 58(1) Journal of World Trade 115 – 130. google scholar
42. Vieira AC, ‘The WTO and the Paris Agreement: A Dialogue on Climate Change Mitigation’ (2020) 11(2) Beijing Law Review 399-414. google scholar
43. Wu M and Salzman J, ‘The Next Generation of Trade and Environment Conflicts: The Rise of Green Industrial Policy’ (2014) 108(2) Northwestern University Law Review 401-474. google scholar
44. Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (15 April 1994) Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1869 UNTS 14. google scholar
45. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (15 April 1994) Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1A, 1867 UNTS 187. google scholar
46. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (15 April 1994) 1867 UNTS 154. google scholar
47. Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (12 December 2015) 3156 UNTS 79. google scholar
48. Appellate Body Report, Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres (17 December 2007) WT/DS332/AB/R. google scholar
49. Appellate Body Report, Canada – Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector / Canada – Measures Relating to the Feed-in Tariff Program (24 May 2013) WT/DS412/AB/R and WT/DS426/AB/R. google scholar
50. Appellate Body Report, India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules (14 October 2016) WT/DS456/AB/R. google scholar
51. Appellate Body Report, Turkey – Restrictions on Imports of Textile and Clothing Products (19 November 1999) WT/DS34/AB/R. google scholar
52. Appellate Body Report, United States – Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (20 April 2005) WT/DS285/AB/R. google scholar
53. Appellate Body Report, United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline (29 April 1996) WT/DS2/AB/R. google scholar
54. Panel Report, Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres (17 December 2007) WT/DS332/R. google scholar
55. Panel Report, Canada – Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector / Canada – Measures Relating to the Feed- in Tariff Program (24 May 2013) WT/DS412/R and WT/DS426/R. google scholar
56. Panel Report, India – Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules (14 October 2016) WT/DS456/R. google scholar
57. Panel Report, Japan – Countervailing Duties on Dynamic Random Access Memories from Korea (17 December 2007) WT/DS336/R. google scholar
58. Panel Report, United States – Restrictions on Imports of Tuna (3 September 1991) GATT DS21/R, 39S/155 (unadopted). google scholar
59. Panel Report, United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline (20 May 1996) WT/DS2/R. google scholar
60. Abu Dhabi Ministrial Declaration WT/MIN(24)/DEC (World Trade Organization, 2 March 2024). google scholar
61. Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, Ministerial Conference Twelfth Session Geneva, 17 June 2022 WT/MIN(22)/33, WT/L/1144′ (World Trade Organization). google scholar
62. Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics WT/MIN(22)/31, WT/L/1142 (World Trade Organization, 17 June 2022). google scholar
63. Overview of Developments in the International Trading Environment, WT/TPR/OV/27 (Trade Policy Review Body, World Trade Organization, 20 November 2024). google scholar
64. Semi-Annual Report under Article 16.4 of the Agreement, European Union G/ADP/N/399/EU (Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices, World Trade Organization, 23 September 2024). google scholar
65. Semi-Annual Report under Article 16.4 of the Agreement, United States G/ADP/N/399/USA (Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices, World Trade Organization, 2 September 2024). google scholar
66. Bown C P, ‘Industrial Policy for Electric Vehicle Supply Chains and the US-EU Fight over the Inflation Reduction Act’ (Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2 May 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
67. Bown C P and Kolb, M, ‘Trump’s Trade War Timeline: An Up-to-Date Guide’ (Peterson Institute for International Economics) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
68. Charnovitz S, ‘Green Subsidies and the WTO’ (2014) Policy Research Working Paper 7060 World Bank accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
69. ‘China Sets $63 Billion to Pay Subsidies Owed to Renewables Firms’ Bloomberg.com (14 March 2022) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
70. ‘China’s EV Makers Got $231 Billion Aid Over 15 Years, Study Says’ Bloomberg.com (21 June 2024) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
71. ‘Combating Climate Change-Taiwan Can Help’ (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China (Taiwan), 13 September 2018) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
72. De Ville F, ‘The Return of Industrial Policy in the European Union’ (GIES Occasional Paper, January 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
73. Dixon H, ‘Green Subsidy Race May Be What the World Needs’ Reuters (6 February 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
74. Draghi M, ‘The Future of European Competitiveness, the European Commission’ (2024) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
75. ‘Fact Sheet Climate Change’ (United Nations Sustainable Transport Conference, 14 October 2021) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
76. Fleming S and Hall B, ‘EU Plans Subsidy for Electric Vehicle Sales to Counter China’ Financial Times (23 January 2025) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
77. Goodman PS and Chokshi N, ‘How the World Ran Out of Everything’ The New York Times (1 June 2021) www.nytimes.com/2021/06/01/business/coronavirus-global-shortages.html> accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
78. Haskett JD, ‘U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement: Process and Potential Effects’ (Congressional Research Service, 2025) CRS Report R48504 accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
79. Howse R, ‘Climate Mitigation Subsidies and the WTO Legal Framework: A Policy Analysis’ accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
80. ‘IMF Country Report Japan No. 23/127’ (2023) Country Report 23/127 accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
81. Krueger AO, ‘From Trade War to Subsidy War’ (Project Syndicate, 15 August 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
82. Meredith S, ‘Rich Countries Are Refusing to Waive the Rights on Covid Vaccines as Global Cases Hit Record Levels’ (CNBC, 22 April 2021) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
83. ‘Paris Agreement, Status’ (United Nations Treaty Collection) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
84. ‘Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements’ (The White House, 20 January 2025) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
85. Rankin J, ‘Leaked EU Plan Reveals Response to US and Chinese Green Subsidies’ The Guardian (31 January 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
86. Restuccia A and Ramkumar A, ‘Biden Is Spending $1 Trillion to Fight Climate Change. Voters Don’t Care.‘ (WSJ, 9 April 2024) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
87. Rotunno L and Ruta M, ‘Trade Spillovers of Domestic Subsidies’ (International Monetary Fund Working Paper WP/24/41, March 2024) accessed 28 September 2025 google scholar
88. Saurav A and Viney B, ‘Catalyzing Investment for Green Growth: The Role of Business Environment and Investment Climate Policy in Environmentally Sustainable Private Sector Development’ (World Bank Group, November 2020) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
89. ‘Speech by President von Der Leyen at the College of Europe in Bruges’ (European Commission - European Commission) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
90. Springford J and Tordoir S, ‘Europe Can Withstand American and Chinese Subsidies for Green Tech’ accessed 28 September 2025 google scholar
91. ‘Technical Dialogue of the First Global Stocktake’ United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (8 September 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
92. ‘Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions (TESSD), Members: 77/164’ (wtoplurilaterals) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
93. ‘United States of America, 2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (December 2024)’ (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) accessed 20 September 2025. google scholar
94. Valeriani A, ‘Renewable energy subsidies and WTO law’ (Ius In Itinere, 13 July 2019) accessed 28 September 2025 google scholar
95. ‘What Is the Paris Agreement?’ (UNFCCC) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
96. Williams A and Fleming S, ‘How Biden’s Climate Law Is Charging US Green Spending and Provoking Europe’ Financial Times (26 January 2023) accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
97. World Trade Organization, ‘Countervailing Initiations by Reporting Member 01/01/1995 - 31/12/2024’ accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
98. World Trade Organization, ‘Members Submitting Acceptance of Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies’ www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/rulesneg_e/fish_e/fish_acceptances_e.htm> accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
99. World Trade Organization, ‘The Legal Status of ‘Joint Statement Initiatives’ and Their Negotiated Outcomes’, February 19, 2021, General Council, WT/GC/W/819′ accessed 11 January 2025. google scholar
100. World Trade Organization, ‘Trade and Environmental Sustainability’ accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar
101. World Trade Organization, ‘WTO Analytical Index, Article 31 Provisional Application’ accessed 28 September 2025. google scholar