4.1 The Global Setting of Biofuel Expansion
73
demand and are double-counted regarding RED II obligations (European Parliament
2018). In a supplementary Delegated Act to address indirect land-use change, the EU
then went a step further and set a gradual phase-out of palm oil-based biodiesel by
2030—against protests and retaliation threats from Malaysia and Indonesia. Memberstates may still import it, but by then, it will no longer count towards the mandate
(European Commission 2019).
4.2 The Architecture of International Biofuel Governance
4.2.1 International Biofuel Governance Initiatives
An emerging framework of international institutions has accompanied the expansion of biofuels worldwide. These institutions, and associated attempts at biofuel
governance, can be clustered into three groups:
i. Initiatives from multilateral bodies whose mandates directly relate to biofuel
issues;
ii. New multilateral bodies created specifically for biofuel governance; and
iii. International multi-stakeholder platforms generally focused on creating biofuel
sustainability standards for voluntary market certification.
Within the UN system, at least two significant attempts at building an international
environmental framework for biofuels took place: one by the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and another at the 10th Conference of the
Parties (COP) to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). When international agricultural commodity prices peaked in 2008, the FAO called a “High-level
Conference on World Food Security” to address “The Challenges of Climate Change
and Bioenergy”. However, it did not agree on international biofuel policies. The final
declaration only called for more dialogue, further R&D investments, and agricultural
trade liberalization (High-level Conference on World Food Security 2008). Later, at
the 10th CBD COP in Nagoya, Japan, high-level discussions on biofuels’ sustainability took place. However, its decision X/37 on “biofuels and biodiversity” was
limited to “recognizing” the substantial risks of unfettered biofuel expansion and to
“inviting” and “encouraging” the parties to undertake sustainability assessments and
adopt policies to minimize negative impacts (CBD 2010).
Outside the UN system, an initiative to articulate efforts has come from the International Energy Agency (IEA), part of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). Its bioenergy branch (IEA Bioenergy) has the exceptional
membership of Brazil and South Africa, non-OECD countries and thus non-IEA
members. It initially set up two task forces on biofuels: Task 39 (“Commercialising
Liquid Biofuels from Biomass”) and Task 40 (“Sustainable International Biofuel
Trade”). Their work has primarily involved production chain and market analysis,
optimization of biofuel technologies, and sustainability criteria for voluntary market
73
demand and are double-counted regarding RED II obligations (European Parliament
2018). In a supplementary Delegated Act to address indirect land-use change, the EU
then went a step further and set a gradual phase-out of palm oil-based biodiesel by
2030—against protests and retaliation threats from Malaysia and Indonesia. Memberstates may still import it, but by then, it will no longer count towards the mandate
(European Commission 2019).
4.2 The Architecture of International Biofuel Governance
4.2.1 International Biofuel Governance Initiatives
An emerging framework of international institutions has accompanied the expansion of biofuels worldwide. These institutions, and associated attempts at biofuel
governance, can be clustered into three groups:
i. Initiatives from multilateral bodies whose mandates directly relate to biofuel
issues;
ii. New multilateral bodies created specifically for biofuel governance; and
iii. International multi-stakeholder platforms generally focused on creating biofuel
sustainability standards for voluntary market certification.
Within the UN system, at least two significant attempts at building an international
environmental framework for biofuels took place: one by the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and another at the 10th Conference of the
Parties (COP) to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). When international agricultural commodity prices peaked in 2008, the FAO called a “High-level
Conference on World Food Security” to address “The Challenges of Climate Change
and Bioenergy”. However, it did not agree on international biofuel policies. The final
declaration only called for more dialogue, further R&D investments, and agricultural
trade liberalization (High-level Conference on World Food Security 2008). Later, at
the 10th CBD COP in Nagoya, Japan, high-level discussions on biofuels’ sustainability took place. However, its decision X/37 on “biofuels and biodiversity” was
limited to “recognizing” the substantial risks of unfettered biofuel expansion and to
“inviting” and “encouraging” the parties to undertake sustainability assessments and
adopt policies to minimize negative impacts (CBD 2010).
Outside the UN system, an initiative to articulate efforts has come from the International Energy Agency (IEA), part of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD). Its bioenergy branch (IEA Bioenergy) has the exceptional
membership of Brazil and South Africa, non-OECD countries and thus non-IEA
members. It initially set up two task forces on biofuels: Task 39 (“Commercialising
Liquid Biofuels from Biomass”) and Task 40 (“Sustainable International Biofuel
Trade”). Their work has primarily involved production chain and market analysis,
optimization of biofuel technologies, and sustainability criteria for voluntary market