Is world trade law a barrier to saving our climate?

The report argues that WTO rules provide sufficient flexibility for countries to implement bold climate measures and that the WTO should not be used as an excuse for policy inaction. It analyzes several policy tools, concluding that most are WTO-consistent if designed non-discriminatorily. Specifically, it finds that energy labels and minimum standards are generally permissible under the TBT Agreement and GATT, and that fuel efficiency standards are likely to meet 'necessity' requirements given the urgency of climate change. Border carbon adjustments are viewed as permissible in principle, though they risk contradicting the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities' by shifting burdens to developing nations. Green subsidies are also deemed largely compatible, provided they do not mandate the use of domestic products. The authors emphasize that the logic of trade expansion inherent in the WTO is fundamentally at odds with GHG reduction goals, suggesting that 'Kyoto-compliance' should take precedence over 'WTO-compliance'.

• WTO rules offer sufficient flexibility for national governments to implement necessary climate measures, and the organization should not be viewed as an insurmountable barrier to climate action.
• Fuel efficiency standards are likely to be found WTO-consistent because the high importance of climate mitigation helps them meet the 'necessity' test required by the TBT Agreement and GATT.
• Border carbon adjustments are permissible under WTO law in principle, provided they are non-discriminatory, though they may be challenged if they appear to be disguised protectionism.
• Border carbon adjustments may conflict with international climate law by shifting the mitigation burden from developed to developing countries, violating the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities'.
• Green subsidies are generally compatible with WTO rules, especially if they are widely available and not contingent on using domestic products (which would make them 'prohibited subsidies').
• The report suggests that the global governance priority should shift from ensuring 'WTO-compliance' to ensuring 'Kyoto-compliance' due to the urgency of the climate crisis.

APA

Bernasconi-Osterwalder, N., & Norpoth, J. (2009). Is world trade law a barrier to saving our climate? Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ClimateTradeReport_foee-ciel_sep09.pdf

Chicago

Bernasconi-Osterwalder, Nathalie, and Johannes Norpoth. Is world trade law a barrier to saving our climate? Center for International Environmental Law, 2009. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ClimateTradeReport_foee-ciel_sep09.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Bernasconi-Osterwalder |first1=Nathalie |last2=Norpoth |first2=Johannes |title=Is world trade law a barrier to saving our climate? |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=September 2009 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ClimateTradeReport_foee-ciel_sep09.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{bernasconiosterwalder2009world, author = {Bernasconi-Osterwalder, Nathalie and Norpoth, Johannes}, title = {{Is world trade law a barrier to saving our climate?}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2009}, month = sep, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ClimateTradeReport_foee-ciel_sep09.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }