棕榈油贸易的可持续性或保护主义:印度尼西亚诉欧盟案(DS593)

Barbara Margarita Radmann
{"title":"棕榈油贸易的可持续性或保护主义:印度尼西亚诉欧盟案(DS593)","authors":"Barbara Margarita Radmann","doi":"10.22367/arbe.2021.01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This paper examines the case DS593 to understand whether the developments in question represent an attempt to further well-justified policy objectives relating to sustainability or represent protectionism in disguise. DS593 came as Indonesia’s reaction to the EU Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II) that limits and bans palm-oil imports for the “foreseeable future”. Indonesia’s strong economic dependence on palm oil exports led it to look at the justification of RED II critically and thus to highlight some inconsist- encies. These inconsistencies center around the EU’s definition of high and low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) risk biofuels. A review of already existing literature on the subject, in combination with the actual WTO agreements were studied to query the issue. It is argued that further deliberation is needed on the side of the EU on what constitutes high or low ILUC risk and on other biofuels apart from palm-oil which are considered unsustainable for EU regulations to not be considered protectionist. Keywords: biomass fuel, palm-oil, WTO, international trade. JEL Classification: Q2, Q270.","PeriodicalId":428833,"journal":{"name":"Academic Review of Business and Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sustainability or protectionism in palm oil trade: The case (DS593) of Indonesia vs. the EU\",\"authors\":\"Barbara Margarita Radmann\",\"doi\":\"10.22367/arbe.2021.01.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: This paper examines the case DS593 to understand whether the developments in question represent an attempt to further well-justified policy objectives relating to sustainability or represent protectionism in disguise. DS593 came as Indonesia’s reaction to the EU Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II) that limits and bans palm-oil imports for the “foreseeable future”. Indonesia’s strong economic dependence on palm oil exports led it to look at the justification of RED II critically and thus to highlight some inconsist- encies. These inconsistencies center around the EU’s definition of high and low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) risk biofuels. A review of already existing literature on the subject, in combination with the actual WTO agreements were studied to query the issue. It is argued that further deliberation is needed on the side of the EU on what constitutes high or low ILUC risk and on other biofuels apart from palm-oil which are considered unsustainable for EU regulations to not be considered protectionist. Keywords: biomass fuel, palm-oil, WTO, international trade. JEL Classification: Q2, Q270.\",\"PeriodicalId\":428833,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Review of Business and Economics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Review of Business and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22367/arbe.2021.01.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Review of Business and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22367/arbe.2021.01.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本文考察了DS593案例,以了解所讨论的事态发展是否代表了进一步推动与可持续性相关的合理政策目标的尝试,还是代表了伪装的保护主义。DS593是印度尼西亚对欧盟可再生能源指令II (RED II)的回应,该指令在“可预见的未来”限制和禁止棕榈油进口。印尼对棕榈油出口的强烈经济依赖,导致它对RED II的合理性进行了批判性的审视,从而强调了一些不一致之处。这些不一致集中在欧盟对间接土地利用变化(ILUC)风险生物燃料的高低定义上。研究人员审查了关于这个问题的现有文献,并结合世贸组织的实际协定,对这个问题提出了疑问。有人认为,欧盟方面需要进一步考虑什么构成高或低的ILUC风险,以及除了棕榈油之外的其他生物燃料,这些生物燃料被认为是欧盟法规不可持续的,而不是被视为保护主义。关键词:生物质燃料,棕榈油,WTO,国际贸易JEL分类:Q2, Q270。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sustainability or protectionism in palm oil trade: The case (DS593) of Indonesia vs. the EU
Abstract: This paper examines the case DS593 to understand whether the developments in question represent an attempt to further well-justified policy objectives relating to sustainability or represent protectionism in disguise. DS593 came as Indonesia’s reaction to the EU Renewable Energy Directive II (RED II) that limits and bans palm-oil imports for the “foreseeable future”. Indonesia’s strong economic dependence on palm oil exports led it to look at the justification of RED II critically and thus to highlight some inconsist- encies. These inconsistencies center around the EU’s definition of high and low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) risk biofuels. A review of already existing literature on the subject, in combination with the actual WTO agreements were studied to query the issue. It is argued that further deliberation is needed on the side of the EU on what constitutes high or low ILUC risk and on other biofuels apart from palm-oil which are considered unsustainable for EU regulations to not be considered protectionist. Keywords: biomass fuel, palm-oil, WTO, international trade. JEL Classification: Q2, Q270.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信