A sectoral approach allows an artful merger of climate and trade policy

被引:0
作者
George David Banks
Timothy Fitzgerald
机构
[1] Energy and Environment at the National Economic and National Security Councils,Rawls College of Business
[2] Texas Tech University,undefined
来源
Climatic Change | 2020年 / 162卷
关键词
Border carbon adjustment; Cooperative sectoral tariff reduction; Climate policy; Trade policy; F18; Q54; Q56;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Climate and trade policy present serious contemporary challenges for all nations. Developed market economies are struggling with trade policy in the modern era of globalization, and the resulting realignments are straining the post-war international economic order. National emissions pledges under the Paris Agreement appear at present to fall far short of achieving the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cuts that science suggests are needed to remain in a < 2 °C world. Merging climate and trade policy could provide developed economies a strategy for limiting global emissions while protecting and promoting their economic competitiveness. Since the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, border carbon adjustments (BCAs) that would help protect domestic energy-intensive industry and prevent leakage have been discussed as a mechanism to make unilateral climate mitigation more politically attractive. Especially if implemented non-cooperatively, BCAs open the backdoor to protectionism and retaliation and potentially allow nations to retreat behind static barriers. Developments in international trade policy make this alternative to traditional climate diplomacy more viable today than previously and also increase the chance of climate protectionism. We propose an alternative policy framework—a cooperative sectoral tariff reduction (CSTR)—that would help provide dynamic incentives to improve performance, reduce the chance of BCAs being coopted for protectionist purposes, and create the foundation of a carbon club.
引用
收藏
页码:165 / 173
页数:8
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
Aldy JE(2017)Frameworks for evaluating policy approaches to address the competitiveness concerns of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions Natl Tax J 70 395-420
[2]  
Aldy JE(2015)The competitiveness impacts of climate change mitigation policies J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 2 565-595
[3]  
Pizer WA(2018)Carbon policy and the structure of global trade World Econ 41 194-221
[4]  
Balistreri EJ(2019)Optimal environmental border adjustments under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Environ Resour Econ 74 1037-1075
[5]  
Böhringer C(2004)Trade, growth, and the environment J Econ Lit 42 7-71
[6]  
Rutherford TF(2019)Developing guidance for implementing border carbon adjustments: lessons, cautions, and research needs from the literature Rev Environ Econ Policy 13 3-22
[7]  
Balistreri EJ(2012)Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: border carbon adjustments versus rebates J Environ Econ Manag 64 199-216
[8]  
Kaffine DT(2017)Carbon tax competitiveness concerns: assessing a best practices carbon credit Natl Tax J 70 447-468
[9]  
Yonezawa H(2018)Unemployment and environmental regulation in general equilibrium J Public Econ 160 50-65
[10]  
Copeland BR(2012)Trade, climate change, and the political game theory of border carbon adjustments Oxford review ofeconomic policy 28 368-394