Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:23:39.135Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES: Trade and the Environment Debate: Recent Developments and Implications for China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2013

Muthukumara Mani
Muthukumara Mani*
Affiliation:
Senior Environmental Economist, South Asia Sustainable Development Department, World Bank, Washington, DC
*
Muthukumara Mani, Senior Environmental Economist, South Asia, Sustainable Development Department, World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433; (phone) 1-202-458-9344; (fax)202-522-2420; (e-mail) [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This report focuses on the current state of debate surrounding environmental goods negotiations under the World Trade Organization in the context of Chinese exports and imports. The report also examines some recent proposals (in United States and European Union) that called for increased trade barriers against imports from nations that have less stringent carbon policies and then draws implications for China.

Environmental Practice 15:313–322 (2013)

Type
Features
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 313 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Antweiler, W., Copeland, B.R., and Taylor, M.S.. 2001. Is Free Trade Good for the Environment? American Economic Review 91(4):877–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Böhringer, C., Rutherford, T. F., and Balistreri, E. J.. 2012. The Role of Border Carbon Adjustment in Unilateral Climate Policy: Overview of an Energy Modeling Forum Study (EMF 29). Energy Economics 34(Suppl. 2):S97–S110.Google Scholar
Branstetter, L.G., Fisman, R., and Foley, C. F.. 2006. Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Panel Data. Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(1):312–349.Google Scholar
Brewer, T.L. 2008, February. Climate Change Policies and Trade Policies: The New Joint Agenda. Background Paper for the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Expert Meeting, Geneva. UNEP, Geneva, 41 pp.http://www.unep.ch/etb/events/Trade%20and%20Climate%20Change/Brewer%20climate%20and%20trade%20paper.pdf.Google Scholar
Cole, M., and Elliott, R.. 2003. Determining the Trade-Environment Composition Effect: The Role of Capital, Labour and Environmental Regulations. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46(3):363–383.Google Scholar
Copeland, B.R., and Taylor, M.S.. 2004. Trade, Growth and the Environment. Journal of Economic Literature 42(1):7–71.Google Scholar
Ederington, J, Levinson, A., and Minier, J.. 2006. Footloose and Pollution Free. Review of Economics and Statistics 87(1):92–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredriksson, P.G., ed. 1999. Trade, Global Policy, and Environment. World Bank Discussion Paper 402. World Bank, Washington, DC, 214 pp.Google Scholar
Grether, J.-M., and de Melo, J.. 2004. Globalization and Dirty Industries: Do Pollution Havens Matter? In Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics, Baldwin, R.E. and Winters, A., eds. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 167–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grether, J.-M., Mathys, N.A., and de Melo, J.. 2009a. Global Manufacturing SO2 Emissions: Does Trade Matter? Review of World Economics 145(4):713–729.Google Scholar
Grether, J.-M., Mathys, N.A., and de Melo, J.. 2009b. Scale, Technique and Composition Effects in Manufacturing SO2 Emissions. Environmental and Resource Economics 43(2):257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hübler, M. 2012. Carbon Tariffs on Chinese Exports: Emissions Reduction, Threat, or Farce? Energy Policy 50(C):315–327.Google Scholar
Jakob, M., Marschinski, R., and Hübler, M.. 2011. Between a Rock and a Hard Place: A Trade-Theory Analysis of Leakage under Production- and Consumption-Based Policies. Paper presented at the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 18th Annual Conference, June 29–July 2, 2011, Rome, 41 pp. Available at http://www.webmeets.com/EAERE/2011/prog/viewpaper.asp?pid=1108.Google Scholar
Lerner, J. 2009. The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues. American Economic Review 99(2):343–348.Google Scholar
Levinson, A., and Taylor, S.. 2008. Unmasking the Pollution Haven Effect. International Economic Review 49(1):223–254.Google Scholar
Low, P., ed. 1992. International Trade and the Environment. World Bank Discussion Paper 159. World Bank, Washington, DC, 365 pp.Google Scholar
Mani, M., and Wheeler, D. 1998. In Search of Pollution Havens? Dirty Industry in the World Economy, 1960–1999. Journal of Environment and Development 7(3):215–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinaud, J. 2008. Climate Policy and Carbon Leakage: Impacts of the European Emissions Trading Scheme on Aluminium. International Energy Agency (IEA) Information Paper. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/IEA, Paris, 45 pp. Available at http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Aluminium_EU_ETS.pdf.Google Scholar
Weitzel, M., Hübler, M., and Peterson, S.. 2012. Fair, Optimal or Detrimental? Environmental vs. Strategic Use of Border Carbon Adjustment. Energy Economics 34(Suppl. 2):S198–S207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank 2008. International Trade and Climate Change: Economic, Legal and Institutional Perspectives. Environment and Development Series. World Bank, Washington, DC, 144 pp.Google Scholar
World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS). N.d. Reference Data. World Bank, Washington, DC. http://wits.worldbank.org/wits/data_details.html.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO). 2001, November 20. Ministerial Declaration. In Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference, November 9–14, 2001, Doha, Qatar. WTO, Geneva, 10 pp. Available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min01_e/mindecl_e.pdf.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO). 2004. Trade and Environment at the WTO. Background paper. WTO, Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/trade_env_e.htm.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO). 2005, November 17. Synthesis of Submissions on Environmental Goods. Committee on Trade and Environment, Special Session. Informal Note by the Secretariat. TN/TE/W/63.17. WTO, Geneva.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO). N.d., a. Eliminating Trade Barriers on Environmental Goods and Services. WTO, Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envir_neg_serv_e.htm.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. N.d., b. WTO Rules and Environmental Policies: GATT Exceptions. WTO, Geneva. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/envt_rules_exceptions_e.htm.Google Scholar