What Does the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change Mean for Environmentally Harmful Subsidies?

The briefing examines the legal implications of the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion on climate change, arguing that the provision of fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act. It extends this reasoning to other harmful subsidies, such as those in agriculture and plastics, and provides recommendations for states to reduce legal risk through transparent, phased reforms and international coordination via the Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives Including Subsidies (COFFIS).

• The ICJ's July 2025 Advisory Opinion establishes that the provision of fossil fuel subsidies is not merely a political issue but a legal imperative, as such subsidies may be considered an internationally wrongful act attributable to a state.
• The ICJ determined that international legal obligations regarding climate change extend beyond direct greenhouse gas emissions to include the "production, licensing and subsidizing" of fossil fuels.
• While the ICJ explicitly mentioned fossil fuel subsidies, its reasoning can be applied by analogy to other climate-harmful subsidies, such as those for plastics and agriculture, because the court included all state actions or omissions that result in the climate system being adversely affected by anthropogenic GHG emissions.
• A state's specific capabilities and available resources are key factors in determining the standard of due diligence required for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, though all states must use all available means to protect the climate system.
• Despite various political commitments from the G7, G20, APEC, and under the UNFCCC, governments have largely failed to meet subsidy reduction pledges; for instance, G7 fossil fuel subsidies rose from USD 66.8 billion in 2014 to USD 133 billion in 2024.
• The ICJ opinion increases international legal risk for countries that have accepted the ICJ's compulsory jurisdiction, which represented 49% of the total volume of fossil fuel subsidies in 2023.
• To mitigate legal risks, the document recommends that states adopt transparent, phased-out plans for harmful subsidies, prioritize social protection for people over fuels, and coordinate through the Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives Including Subsidies (COFFIS).

APA

Jones, N. (2026). What Does the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change Mean for Environmentally Harmful Subsidies? International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-environmentally-harmful-subsidies.pdf

Chicago

Jones, Natalie. What Does the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change Mean for Environmentally Harmful Subsidies? International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2026. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-environmentally-harmful-subsidies.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Jones |first1=Natalie |title=What Does the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change Mean for Environmentally Harmful Subsidies? |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=March 2026 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-environmentally-harmful-subsidies.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{jones2026what, author = {Jones, Natalie}, title = {{What Does the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on Climate Change Mean for Environmentally Harmful Subsidies?}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2026}, month = mar, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2026-03/icj-advisory-opinion-environmentally-harmful-subsidies.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }