Research On The Case That Canada-certain Measures Affecting The Renewable Energy Generation Sector

Nowadays, countries around the world have carried out laws and policies to promote thesustainable development of domestic renewable energy industry in the transition to a lowcarbon economy environment，which also led to many frequent international trade disputes.The Canada’s Ontario province implemented the plan of Feed-in Tariff (FIT) in2009in orderto develop and encourage the use of renewable energy. According to this plan, Ontario PowerAuthority will sign long-term contract with renewable energy generators and purchaseelectricity at a fixed price from them, but the condition is that renewable energy generatorsneed to use the prescribed proportion of local products or services, namely "domestic contentrequirements" measures. Against this measure, Japan put forward consultation with Canadaunder the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). At last DSB set up the Panel to hear the casebecause of the fruitless negotiation. In2012December, the Panel released the report. BothCanada and Japan appealed to the Appellate Body to make further decisions. The AppellateBody report published in2013May.This paper is based on the case that Canada—Certain Measures Affecting theRenewable Energy Generation Sector. According to Japan’s specific claims, it will deeplyanalyze the correspondences between Canada’s FIT measures and Article3.4of theGATT1994, Article2.1of the TRIMs Agreement and prohibited subsidy rules of the SCMAgreement, finally further analyze the enlightenment to China.The full text is divided into four parts, as follows:The first part: the basic situation of the case. This part consists of three sections: firstly,the introduction of the background; secondly, a complete description of the developmentprocess of disputes, from Japan’s request for consultations with Canada to the reports releasedby the Panel and the Appellate Body; thirdly, the summary of the main focus of the disputebetween Japan and Canada. The detail will be elaborated in the subsequent second and thirdpart.The second part: the correspondence between the relevant measures of Canada andArticle2.1of the TRIMs Agreement and Article3.4of GATT1994. The two terms areprovisions relating to national treatment obligation. In this part, firstly judging whether thedisputed measure is trade related investment measure, and then using the TRIMs annex illustrative list to argue the compliance with the provisions of national treatment. Finallyanalyzing its compliance with Article3.8(a) of the GATT1994from “procurement bygovernmental agencies” perspective.The third part: the correspondence between the relevant measures of Canada andprohibited subsidy rules of the SCM Agreement. This part begins on the definition of subsidyof the SCM Agreement Article1.1and analyzes whether the disputed measure constitutes thegovernmental “financial contribution” or “income or price support” which confer a “benefit”to renewable energy generators, and then draws the corresponding conclusion.The fourth part: the enlightenment to China. The first, from the legal issues andexplanations judged by the Panel and the Appellate Body in this case, finding what can helpthe solution of the case that European Union and certain Member States—Certain MeasuresAffecting the Renewable Energy Generation Sector. The second, putting forward somesuggestions to avoid trade friction and promote the development of China’s renewable energyindustry in the international environment about an increasing contradiction between climatechange and international trade.