Clearing the Air: The Meta-Standard Approach to Ensuring Biofuels Environmental and Social Sustainability
By Jody M. Endres
ABSTRACT
Despite early promise, the environmental and social sustainability of plant-based biofuels increasingly has come into question. Biofuels standards quickly are transforming at international, national, and state levels from merely carbon-consciousness to inclusion of environmental, social and economic criteria in the definition of “sustainable.” The danger going forward is that governments may impose a redundant labyrinth of sustainability regulations that are counterproductive to ambitious incentive programs and of questionable cross-boundary enforceability. As the U.S. and California develop biofuels regulations, policymakers should consider other existing and developing standards in crafting sustainability standards, including the meta-standard approach adopted in the U.K. and by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels, and the EU's future sustainability scheme. This approach would ameliorate the uncertainty inherent in a drawn-out regulatory process, and may avoid future trade disputes because of the meta-standard's consideration of third-country regulations. The question remains, however, whether existing U.S. and state agro-environmental standards could qualify under the meta-standard. Despite the EPA's conclusion to the contrary, existing and developing standards that meet or will likely meet the U.K. meta-standard could be used by U.S. biofuels producers, with small modifications to meet unique U.S. land-use provisions. Although pushback is likely from the conventional agricultural sector, the biofuels industry recognizes that sustainability will ensure the competitiveness critical to a nascent biofuels industry facing volatile and unfavorable market conditions.
Despite early promise, the environmental and social sustainability of plant-based biofuels increasingly has come into question. Biofuels standards quickly are transforming at international, national, and state levels from merely carbon-consciousness to inclusion of environmental, social and economic criteria in the definition of “sustainable.” The danger going forward is that governments may impose a redundant labyrinth of sustainability regulations that are counterproductive to ambitious incentive programs and of questionable cross-boundary enforceability. As the U.S. and California develop biofuels regulations, policymakers should consider other existing and developing standards in crafting sustainability standards, including the meta-standard approach adopted in the U.K. and by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels, and the EU's future sustainability scheme. This approach would ameliorate the uncertainty inherent in a drawn-out regulatory process, and may avoid future trade disputes because of the meta-standard's consideration of third-country regulations. The question remains, however, whether existing U.S. and state agro-environmental standards could qualify under the meta-standard. Despite the EPA's conclusion to the contrary, existing and developing standards that meet or will likely meet the U.K. meta-standard could be used by U.S. biofuels producers, with small modifications to meet unique U.S. land-use provisions. Although pushback is likely from the conventional agricultural sector, the biofuels industry recognizes that sustainability will ensure the competitiveness critical to a nascent biofuels industry facing volatile and unfavorable market conditions.
