English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

According to the European Union’s recast Renewable Energy Directive (RED II), the EU aims to phase out feedstock biofuels that involve high indirect land-use change (ILUC) by 2030, which includes crude palm oil only. Indonesia, the world’s leading producer of crude palm oil, contests this regulation, claiming that the classification of biofuels as being produced with high- or low-risk ILUC is discriminatory and inherently protectionist. This study examines the critical ambiguities of protectionism and sustainability, using a legal framework to empirically ascertain the nature of RED II and Indonesia’s institutional response. Southeast Asian palm oil and European vegetable oils (such as rapeseed and sunflower oils) are considered ‘like products’ under World Trade Organization criteria that emphasise product-related process and production methods. RED II has the potential to qualify for exemptions under GATT article XX. However, the extraterritoriality of RED II, which aims to reduce emissions, is contested, as is the unilateral nature of the ILUC risk measurements.

The Status of Palm Oil Under the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive: Sustainability or Protectionism?