Skip to main content
×
×
Home

‘The wide and the narrow gate’: Benchmarking in the SCM Agreement after the Canada–Renewable Energy/FIT Ruling

  • LUCA RUBINI (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

This article discusses the future of benchmarking after the Canada–Renewable Energy/FIT case. This decision left us with bad law. Assuming that any momentous shift, especially in the current regulatory framework that does not provide for any express justification for good subsidies, is difficult, we speculate on what may lie ahead for future litigants and the dispute settlement. Either ‘a wide’ or ‘a narrow road’ can now be followed. After outlining the risks that a normalization and expansion of this ruling may pose (the ‘wide road’), we have responded to the call for clarification and narrowing of this case (the ‘narrow road’) and speculated on how this could be done. The EU Altmark decision of the European Court of Justice, which was certainly on the minds of the EU litigators and whose ethos the Appellate Body embraced by referring to the use of ‘price-discovery mechanisms’, has inspired the analysis. The exercise has, however, exposed many challenges and difficulties, many of them having already occurred in EU law. The amount of helpful clarification the WTO judicature could offer is thus limited, and would probably be restricted to taking the link between market definition and benchmarking seriously. This unsatisfactory conclusion leads to suggest, once again, law reform as the only solution to the current status quo.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Email: L.rubini@bham.ac.uk
References
Hide All
Bigdeli S. (2014), ‘Clash of Rationalities: Revisiting the Trade and Environment Debate in Light of WTO Disputes over Green Industrial Policy’, Trade, Law and Development, 6(1): 177209.
Biondi A. and Rubini L. (2005), Aims, Effects and Justifications: EC State Aid Law and Its Impact on National Social Policies, in Dougan M. and Spaventa E. (eds.), Social Welfare and EU Law, Hart Publishing, pp. 79103.
Breckenridge A. (2013a), ‘FIT for Purpose? A Review of the Economics of a WTO Panel Ruling on Feed-In Tariffs and Local Content Requirements’, Client Briefing, Frontier Economics, March 2013.
Breckenridge A. (2013b), ‘A Matter of Definition – Commentary of Aspects of the Appellate Body's Ruling on the Canada – Renewable Energy Case in the WTO’, Client Briefing, Frontier Economics, October 2013.
Casier L. and Moerenhout T. (2013), WTO Members, Not the Appellate Body, Need to Clarify Boundaries in Renewable Energy Support, IISD Commentary, July 2013.
Charnovitz S. and Fischer C. (2015), ‘Canada – Certain Measures Affecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector/Canada – Measures Relating to the Feed-In Tariff Program’, World Trade Review, forthcoming.
Cosbey A. and Mavroidis P. C. (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, 17(1): 1147.
Cosbey A. and Rubini L. (2013), Does it FIT? An Assessment of the Effectiveness of Renewable Energy Measures and of the Implications of the Canada – Renewable Energy/FIT disputes, E-15 Issue Paper, Autumn 2013.
European Commission (1997), ‘EU Commission Notice on the Definition of the Relevant Market for the Purposes of Community Competition Law’, OJ C 372, 9.12.1997, pp. 5–13.
European Commission (2005a), Commission Decision of 28 November 2005 on the Application of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty to State Aid in the Form of Public Service Compensation Granted to Certain Undertakings Entrusted with the Operation of Services of General Economic Interest’ (notified under document number C(2005) 2673)’, OJ L 312, 29.11.2005, pp. 67–73.
European Commission (2005b), ‘Community Framework for State Aid in the Form of Public Service Compensation’, OJ C 297, 29.11.2005, pp. 4–7.
European Commission (2005c), ‘Commission Directive 2006/111/EC of 16 November 2006 on the Transparency of Financial Relations between Member States and Public Undertakings as well as on Financial Transparency within Certain Undertakings’ (Codified version) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 318, 17.11.2006, pp. 17–25.
European Commission (2012a), ‘Communication from the Commission on the Application of the European Union State Aid Rules to Compensation Granted for the Provision of Services of General Economic Interest’, OJ 2012 C 8/4.
European Commission (2012b), ‘Commission Decision of 20 December on the Application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State Aid in the Form of Public Service Compensation Granted to Certain Undertakings Entrusted with the Operation of Services of General Economic Interest’, OJ 2012 L 7/13.
European Commission (2012c), ‘Communication from the Commission, European Union Frame-Work for State Aid in the Form of Public Service Compensation (2011)’, OJ 2012 C 8/15.
European Commission (2012d), ‘Commission Regulation on the Application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de Minimis Aid Granted to Undertakings Providing Services of General Economic Interest’, OJ L 114, 26.4.2012, pp. 8–13.
European Commission (2014a), ‘Communication from the Commission – Guidelines on State Aid for Environmental Protection and Energy 2014–2020’, OJ C 200, 28.6.2014, pp. 1–55.
European Commission (2014b), ‘European Commission Memo, Energy and Environmental State Aid Guidelines – Frequently Asked Questions’, Brussels, 9 April 2014,
Flett J. (2014), ‘How to Get FIT in Eight Easy Steps’, note distributed at the Fourteenth Annual WTO Conference, 14–15 May 2014, London, on file with the author.
Hestermeyer H. and Nielsen L. (2014), ‘The Legality of Local Content Measures under WTO Law’, Journal of World Trade, 48(3): 553591.
Kemplerer P. (2002), ‘What Really Matters in Auction Design’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(1): 169189.
Kent A. and Jha V. (2014), ‘Keeping Up with the Changing Climate: The WTO's Evolutive Approach in Response to the Trade and Climate Conundrum’, Journal of World Trade of Investment and Trade, 15: 245271.
Krueger T. (2013), ‘Shaping the WTO's Institutional Evolution: The EU as a Strategic Litigant in the WTO’, in Kochenov D. and Antembrink F. (eds.), The European Union's Shaping of the International Legal Order, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169190.
Gerardin D. (2012), ‘Public Compensation for Services of General Economic Interest: An Analysis of the 2011 European Commission Framework’, European State Aid Law Quarterly, Supplement 2012/2, pp. 5162.
Lang A. (2014), Governing ‘As If’: Global Subsidies Regulation and the Benchmark Problem, LSE, Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 12/2014, August 2014.
Neven D. and Sykes A. (2014), ‘United States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (Second Complaint): Some Comments’, World Trade Review, 13(2): 281298.
Nitsche R. and Heidhues P. (2006), ‘Study on Methods to Analyse the Impact of State Aid on Competition’, European Commission Economic Paper, Number 244, February 2006.
Pal R. (2014), ‘Has the Appellate Body's Decision in Canada – Renewable Energy/Canada – Feed-in Tariff Program Opened the Door for Production Subsidies’, Journal of International Economic Law, 17(1): 125137.
Righini E. (2012), ‘The Reform of the State Aid Rules on Financing of Public Services Paving the Way towards a Clearer, Simpler and more Diversified Framework’, European State Aid Law Quarterly, Supplement 2012/2, pp. 316.
Rubini L. (2009), The Definition of Subsidy and State Aid: WTO and EC Law in Comparative Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rubini L. (2014a), What Does the Recent WTO Litigation on Renewable Energy Subsidies Tell Us about Methodology in Legal Analysis? The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Working Paper, 2014/05, Robert Schuman Center for Advanced Studies.
Rubini L. (2014b), ‘The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Lessons on Methodology in Legal Analysis from the Recent WTO Litigation on Renewable Energy Subsidies’, Journal of World Trade, 48(5): 895938.
Santamato S. and Pesaresi N. (2004), ‘Compensation for Services of General Economic Interest: Some Thoughts on the Altmark Ruling’, Competition policy Newsletter, 1(Spring): 1721.
Santos A. (2013), ‘Carving Out Policy Autonomy for Developing Countries in the World Trade Organization – The Experience of Brazil and Mexico’, in Trubek D. M., Garcia H. A., Coutinho D. R., and Santos A., Law and the New Developmental State, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 167245.
Sykes A. O. (2010), ‘The Questionable Case for Subsidies Regulation: A Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Legal Analysis, 2(2): 473523.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

World Trade Review
  • ISSN: 1474-7456
  • EISSN: 1475-3138
  • URL: /core/journals/world-trade-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 2
Total number of PDF views: 67 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 446 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 15th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.