Box 7: Biofuels and the World Trade Organization
The World Trade Organization (WTO) does not currently have a trade regime specific to
biofuels. International trade in biofuels falls, therefore, under the rules of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994), which covers trade in all goods, as
well as other relevant WTO Agreements such as the Agreement on Agriculture, the
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
Agricultural products are subject to the GATT and to the general rules of the WTO
insofar as the Agreement on Agriculture does not contain derogating provisions.
Key trade-related issues include the classification for tariff purposes of biofuel
products as agricultural, industrial or environmental goods; the role of subsidies in
increasing production; and the degree of consistency among various domestic measures and
WTO standards.
The Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) covers products from Chapters 1 to 24 of the
Harmonized System, with the exception of fish and fish products and the addition of a
number of specific products, such as hides and skins, silk, wool, cotton, flax and
modified starches.
The discipline of the AoA is based on three pillars: market access, domestic subsidies
and export subsidies. One of the main features of the AoA is that it allows Members to
pay subsidies in derogation from the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
The Harmonized System classification affects how products are characterized under
specific WTO Agreements. For example, ethanol is considered an agricultural product and
is therefore subject to Annex 1 of the WTO AoA. Biodiesel, on the other hand, is
considered an industrial product and is therefore not subject to the disciplines of the
AoA. Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Development Agenda has launched negotiations on “the
reduction or, as appropriate, elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to
environmental goods and services”. Some WTO Members have suggested that renewable energy
products, including ethanol and biodiesel, should be classified as “environmental goods”
and therefore subject to negotiations under the “Environmental Goods and Services”
cluster.
Source: based on FAO, 2007b and GBEP, 2007.
Source: FAO, The State of Food and Agriculture, Biofuels: Prospects, Risks and Opportunities (2008) ,
Chapter 4, p.52
Related publication:
Other Figures & Tables on this publication:
TABLE 1: Biofuel production by country, 2007
TABLE 2: Biofuel yields for different feedstocks and countries
TABLE 3: Hypothetical potential for ethanol from principal cereal and sugar crops
TABLE 4: Voluntary and mandatory bioenergy targets for transport fuels in G8+5
countries
TABLE 5: Applied tariffs on ethanol in selected countries
TABLE 6: Total support estimates for biofuels in selected OECD economies in 2006
TABLE 7: Approximate average and variable rates of support per litre of biofuel in
selected OECD economies
TABLE 8: Energy demand by source and sector: reference scenario
TABLE 9: Land requirements for biofuel production
TABLE 10: Water requirements for biofuel crops
TABLE 11: Import bills of total food and major food commodities for 2007 and their
percentage increase over 2006
TABLE 12: Net importers of petroleum products and major cereals, ranked by
prevalence of undernourishment
TABLE 13: Share of net staple food-seller households among urban, rural and total
households
Box 1: Other types of biomass for heat, power and transport
Box 2: Biotechnology applications for biofuels
Box 3: Biofuel policies in Brazil
Box 4: Biofuel policies in the United States of America
Box 5: Biofuel policies in the European Union
Box 6: Main sources of uncertainty for biofuel projections
Box 7: Biofuels and the World Trade Organization
Box 8: Biofuels and preferential trade initiatives
Box 9: The Global Bioenergy Partnership
Box 10: Biofuels and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Box 11: Jatropha – a “miracle” crop?
Box 12: Agricultural growth and poverty reduction
Box 13: Cotton in the Sahel
Box 14: Biofuel crops and the land issue in the United Republic of Tanzania
Figure 1: World primary energy demand by source, 2005
Figure 2: Total primary energy demand by source and region, 2005
Figure 3: Trends in consumption of transport biofuels
Figure 4: Biofuels – from feedstock to end use
Figure 5: Uses of biomass for energy
Figure 6: Conversion of agricultural feedstocks into liquid biofuels
Figure 7: Estimated ranges of fossil energy balances of selected fuel types
Figure 8: Support provided at different points in the biofuel supply chain
Figure 9: Biofuel production costs in selected countries, 2004 and 2007
Figure 10: Breakeven prices for crude oil and selected feedstocks in 2005
Figure 11: Breakeven prices for maize and crude oil in the United States of
America
Figure 12: Breakeven prices for maize and crude oil with and without subsidies
Figure 13: Maize and crude oil breakeven prices and observed prices, 2003–08
Figure 14: Price relationships between crude oil and other biofuel feedstocks,
2003-08
Figure 15: Food commodity price trends 1971–2007, with projections to 2017
Figure 16: Global ethanol production, trade and prices, with projections to 2017
Figure 17: Major ethanol producers, with projections to 2017
Figure 18: Global biodiesel production, trade and prices, with projections to 2017
Figure 19: Major biodiesel producers, with projections to 2017
Figure 20: Total impact of removing trade-distorting biofuel policies for ethanol,
2013–17 average
Figure 21: Total impact of removing trade-distorting biofuel policies for
biodiesel, 2013–17 average
Figure 22: Life-cycle analysis for greenhouse gas balances
Figure 23: Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of selected biofuels relative to
fossil fuels
Figure 24: Potential for cropland expansion
Figure 25: Potential for yield increase for selected biofuel feedstock crops
Figure 26: Potential for irrigated area expansion
Figure 27: Agricultural trade balance of least-developed countries
Figure 28: Distribution of poor net buyers and sellers of staple foods1
Figure 29: Average welfare gain/loss from a 10 percent increase in the price of
the main staple, by income (expenditure) quintile for rural and urban households