Into the Void: The Inflation Reduction Act Panel Ruling and the Crisis of WTO Reform
By Vahini Naidu
On 30 January 2026, a WTO Panel ruled that the domestic content bonus credits under the United States’ Inflation Reduction Act violated the GATT 1994, the TRIMs Agreement, and the SCM Agreement. The United States appealed the ruling to a non-functional Appellate Body, sending it into a legal void. Read against the backdrop of WTO reform discussions that culminated at the Fourteenth Ministerial Conference in Yaoundé in March 2026, the ruling is far more than a bilateral dispute. It exposes the central contradictions in the reform agenda: the Members most vocally demanding new disciplines on others’ subsidy practices have themselves demonstrated both the willingness to operate prohibited measures and the capacity to do so without meaningful consequence. This paper unpacks the Panel’s findings, situates them within the post MC14 reform process, and draws out the implications for developing countries. It argues that the Level Playing Field track must be reframed around compliance symmetry and policy space; that dispute settlement restoration must be decoupled from other reform tracks; that the African Group’s call for reinstatement of non-actionable subsidy categories under Article 8 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (ASCM) is the most operationally precise developing country proposal currently on the table; and that the United States’ parallel push to render Article XXI(b) fully self-judging threatens to create a zone of immunity for industrial policy that is structurally unavailable to the majority of developing countries.
Reform Proposals on Decision-Making at the WTO: Mapping the Consensus Debate in the light of the Marrakesh Agreement
By Vahini Naidu
This Analytical Note maps the consensus and decision-making proposals advanced in the pre- and post-MC14 WTO reform communications in the light of the Marrakesh Agreement. For each proposal it asks the same question: if the proposal were adopted, what in the Agreement would have to change, and through which legal route? The submissions are sorted into four analytical groups according to their effect on the consensus rule, and for the proposals that engage the Agreement’s text, the Note identifies whether the route is amendment, authoritative interpretation, a change to the Rules of Procedure, or an arrangement outside the Agreement, and sets out the procedure the Agreement prescribes.
The Note shows that Article IX:1, the consensus rule, and Article X:9, governing the incorporation of plurilateral agreements into Annex 4, are both entrenched by Article X:2, so that an amendment to either will take effect only upon acceptance by all Members.
A plurilateral agreement concluded and implemented outside the WTO requires no amendment to the Marrakesh Agreement. Article II:3 has no bearing on such an agreement until it is incorporated into Annex 4, and only that step of incorporation engages Article X:9 and its consensus requirement. The authoritative-interpretation power under Article IX:2 cannot be used to undermine Article X and therefore cannot substitute for amendment where the object is to change the consensus or incorporation rules.
Decolonising Intellectual Property Law: An Afrocentric Approach
A book review
By Nkem Itanyi
This paper examines Decolonising Intellectual Property Law: An Afrocentric Approach as a transformative intervention in global intellectual property (IP) discussions. Drawing on the book’s central claim that contemporary IP frameworks were designed for Western priorities and subsequently imposed on Africa through colonial legal transplantation, the paper evaluates how Eurocentric assumptions about creativity, ownership, and individual authorship have displaced African systems of communal knowledge governance.
TOOLKIT: Leveraging the Universal Periodic Review to Advance the Rights of Women and Girls to the Highest Attainable Standards of Health
By Daniel Uribe Terán
This Toolkit serves as an operational guide for State officials, policymakers, civil society organisations (CSOs), national human rights institutions (NHRIs), and healthcare professionals on how to leverage the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism. The primary focus is advancing the rights of women and girls to the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, with a specific focus on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR).
The toolkit outlines the international normative frameworks, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), that establish state obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil these rights, as set out in the availability, accessibility, acceptability, and quality (AAAQ) framework. It details evidence-gathering strategies using a Human Rights-Based Approach to Data (HRBAD), guidelines for drafting impactful stakeholder or “shadow” reports, and the integration of specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) recommendations. Furthermore, it emphasises national implementation mechanisms, showcasing digital tracking innovations like Paraguay’s System for Monitoring Recommendations (SIMORE) and the Pacific region’s Integrated Management and Planning of Actions Open Source Software (IMPACT OSS). Real-world state reporting dynamics are illustrated through 4th-cycle UPR report excerpts from Mexico, South Africa, and Costa Rica.
Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water: Making Wealth Taxes Work in Developing Countries
By Anne Wanyagathi Maina
As debt burdens rise, fiscal space narrows, and inequality rises, developing countries continue to struggle to finance development needs without resorting to regressive taxation or triggering social unrest. In this context, wealth taxation is gaining renewed attention as an alternative. This policy brief explores the relevance and feasibility of net wealth taxes in developing countries, reviewing the implementation experiences in Latin America and Africa, as well as key criticisms and objections, which range from efficiency concerns, administrative challenges, limited revenue yield, to political resistance. The brief argues that these challenges can be overcome through a well-designed wealth tax supported by international cooperation and domestic reforms to improve capacity and transparency. It calls for more research from a developing-country perspective on the effectiveness of such taxes and urges governments to pursue carefully designed wealth taxes aligned with national priorities to support progressive and sustainable revenue mobilization.
The South Centre’s Contributions to the Reform of the International Tax System
By Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The South Centre has, over the last 30 years, contributed to major reforms to the international tax system to make it fairer and more equitable for developing countries. Some of the key impacts relate to the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation and updates to the UN Model Tax Convention to strengthen developing countries’ taxing rights on automated digital services, shipping and air transport, services more broadly, extractive industries, insurance premiums, computer software, offshore indirect transfers of capital gains, the subject to tax rule and wealth taxes. The South Centre also produced pioneering revenue estimates for its Member States on the UN and OECD solutions for taxing the digital economy.
Transparency Without Results: UN Climate Reports Fail to Show Effective Transfer of
Technology to Developing Countries
By Ningxiner Li, intern of the Health, Intellectual Property and Biodiversity Programme (HIPB) at the South Centre
This report synthesizes the findings of research on the reporting and compliance mechanisms governing transfer of technology obligations of developed country Parties under the United Nations climate change regime. The legal basis for transfer of technology has evolved from foundational principles in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to an enhanced transparency framework (ETF) as part of the Paris Agreement, with defined modalities, procedures and guidelines for the transparency framework for action and support (MPGs). The ETF requires that developed countries submit Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) detailing their transfer of technology provided to developing countries. Our review of developed countries’ first BTR submissions reveals significant shortcomings that hinder proper evaluation of compliance with the transfer of technology obligations. The current system allows reporting that meets procedural requirements but fails to deliver clear, comparable, and outcome-oriented data essential for enforcing the legal obligations on transfer of technology and ensuring it serves as a genuine catalyst for global climate actions. This report argues that the ETF, as currently operationalized, prioritizes procedural transparency over substantive effectiveness. The design of the reporting requirements is characterized by discretionary language, fragmented methodologies, and weak linkages between financial and technological support. These features undermine the ability of Parties, review bodies, and the global stocktake to assess whether technology is being delivered in a manner that meaningfully supports developing countries’ climate action. Recommendations are advanced to strengthen reporting requirements, enhance traceability and comparability, and reorient the transparency framework toward measurable outcomes rather than process-based compliance. As the first comprehensive review of the first BTR submissions by developed countries, this report is intended to provide an evidentiary foundation for the 2028 MPGs review.
Addressing the Systemic Risks of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to Climate Action
Informal Note, 5 June 2026
By Daniel Uribe Terán, Lead Programme Officer, Sustainable Development and Climate Change Programme, South Centre
The current international investment agreement (IIA) framework, featuring over 2,200 treaties with Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, acts as a structural barrier to the implementation of key aspects of the Paris Agreement. By protecting fossil fuel investments, those treaties create significant financial risks that may induce “regulatory chill,” deterring states from implementing necessary climate mitigation measures. Recent rulings from the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court of Human Rights have affirmed states’ sovereign rights to regulate for climate action, providing new legal tools to challenge the ISDS status quo. However, these judicial developments do not eliminate litigation risks or guarantee favourable outcomes. Consequently, states must pursue systemic reform, including treaty modernisation, the termination of outdated IIAs, the implementation of comprehensive climate carve-outs, and restrictions on forward-looking damages. Addressing these legal barriers at upcoming forums like the 64th sessions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Subsidiary Bodies (SB 64) is essential to align international investment law with the existential imperative of a low-emission transition.
Charting Green Industrial Futures: Advancing Global South Cooperation for a Just Transition
By Danish
Accelerating green industrialisation is essential for Global South countries to align their national climate action with job creation, economic growth and sustainable development. However, they face persistent barriers in access to finance, clean technologies, and policy space needed to implement green industrial policies. This policy brief argues that these constraints can be effectively addressed by developing countries through expanding their international cooperation in climate, trade and industry. Through the analysis of three institutional mechanisms emerging from the Global South – the Africa Green Industrialisation Initiative (AGII), the International Solar Alliance (ISA), and the Integrated Forum on Climate Change and Trade (IFCCT), the brief highlights some ways for developing countries to shape their own green industrial futures and advance a just transition.
The sixty-fourth sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SB64), Belém indicators, plastic treaty and Santa Marta outcomes
Informal Note, 5 June 2026
By Daniel Uribe Terán, Lead Programme Officer, and Touba Esfahani Nejad, Intern, of the Sustainable Development and Climate Change Programme (SDCC) at the South Centre
The Belém Adaptation Indicators agreed at COP30 to make adaptation more measurable. While the measurement of the adaptation efforts is a step forward, it is not sufficient. The indicators can be used for comparison and surveillance. However, the adaptation objective of the Paris Agreement is to enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience and reduce vulnerability of persons and of vulnerable ecosystems that are critical for the maintenance of forest ecosystems and the provision of forest ecosystem services. To achieve these objectives, it is necessary to take effective action to provide finance, technology transfer, debt relief and capacity-building. In SB64, developing countries will have the opportunity to discuss what is the role of reporting while support for implementing adaptation measures are missing.
The Digital Trade Data Heist: Trade Agreement Limits on Data Transfer and Storage Regulation Could Undercut Data Governance
By Daniel Rangel, Jai Vipra, and Lori Wallach
Governments worldwide are increasingly regulating how data is collected, transferred and stored to advance public interest objectives, including privacy, national security, taxation of the digital economy, and competition in the emerging artificial intelligence (AI) field. However, recent “digital trade” rules in international agreements — particularly those modeled on the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) — restrict governments’ ability to regulate cross-border data flows or to require local data storage. This paper analyzes the expanding divergence between domestic data-governance measures and binding trade commitments. It evaluates three major models of digital trade rules (USMCA, Mercosur (Mercado Común del Sur), and European Union–New Zealand) and demonstrates that the USMCA framework imposes the most sweeping constraints and the weakest exceptions. The analysis also shows that such trade rules may hinder broader regulatory efforts related to taxation and AI accountability.
Meeting the 2030 Target on Reducing the Global Burden of AMR: Pathways for Strengthening and Leveraging Surveillance in Developing Countries
By Prateek Sharma and Viviana Munoz Tellez
Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) poses a major and growing threat to global health, yet low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face significant challenges in implementing AMR surveillance –collection and analysis of data on AMR. Global AMR targets, including the United Nations’ goal of reducing AMR-associated deaths by 10 percent by 2030 and achieving diagnostic capacity in 80 percent of countries, rely on surveillance data that are often incomplete, hospital-centered, and unrepresentative of community infections in LMICs. While the Global Antimicrobial Resistance and Use Surveillance System (GLASS) of the World Health Organization (WHO) provides a standardized framework, in LMICs limited access to diagnostics, high laboratory costs, and reliance on data from specialized hospitals constrain participation and data comparability. Modeling studies have helped quantify the global burden of AMR, yet their reliance on sparse LMIC data underscores the need for improved primary surveillance. Achieving the United Nations’ 2030 target—where 80 per cent of countries can test resistance in all GLASS pathogens—will require substantial investment, technical support, and sustained political commitment. Embedding AMR surveillance within health systems and strengthening pandemic prevention and preparedness can help unlock external funding for eligible LMICs through the Pandemic Fund and the Global Fund.
