Global Environmental Policy and Global Trade Policy

J. Frankel
{"title":"Global Environmental Policy and Global Trade Policy","authors":"J. Frankel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1354671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The global climate regime, as represented by the Kyoto Protocol, may be on a collision course with the global trade policy regime, as represented by the WTO (World Trade Organization). Environmentalists fear that international trade will undercut reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as dirty production migrates to non-participating countries, a phenomenon known as leakage. Meanwhile businesspeople fear the effects on their own competitiveness of the same phenomenon. These fears have now become prominent in the policy-making process. In early 2008, legislation to enact long-term targets for reduced emission of greenhouse gases included provisions for possible barriers against imports from countries perceived as non-participating--in both Washington, DC (where the bills have not yet passed) and in Brussels (where the EU Commission Directive has gone into effect). Such provisions could be interpreted as violations of the rules of the WTO, which poses the nightmare scenario of a WTO panel rejecting a major country's climate change legislation. In light of the hostile feelings that such a scenario would unleash, it would be a nightmare for the supporters of the WTO and free trade as much as for the supporters of the Kyoto Protocol and environmental protection. The issue is just the latest and largest instance of fears among many environmentalists that the WTO is an obstacle to their goals in general. The issue transcends institutions. For the critics, the WTO is a symbol of globalization, and their fears attach also to that larger phenomenon. The first part of this paper discusses the broader issue of whether environmental goals in general are threatened by free trade and the WTO. The second half of the paper focuses exclusively on the narrower question of trade aspects of nations' efforts to implement climate change policy and whether they are likely to come into conflict with the WTO.","PeriodicalId":110014,"journal":{"name":"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"44","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1354671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 44

Abstract

The global climate regime, as represented by the Kyoto Protocol, may be on a collision course with the global trade policy regime, as represented by the WTO (World Trade Organization). Environmentalists fear that international trade will undercut reductions in greenhouse gas emissions as dirty production migrates to non-participating countries, a phenomenon known as leakage. Meanwhile businesspeople fear the effects on their own competitiveness of the same phenomenon. These fears have now become prominent in the policy-making process. In early 2008, legislation to enact long-term targets for reduced emission of greenhouse gases included provisions for possible barriers against imports from countries perceived as non-participating--in both Washington, DC (where the bills have not yet passed) and in Brussels (where the EU Commission Directive has gone into effect). Such provisions could be interpreted as violations of the rules of the WTO, which poses the nightmare scenario of a WTO panel rejecting a major country's climate change legislation. In light of the hostile feelings that such a scenario would unleash, it would be a nightmare for the supporters of the WTO and free trade as much as for the supporters of the Kyoto Protocol and environmental protection. The issue is just the latest and largest instance of fears among many environmentalists that the WTO is an obstacle to their goals in general. The issue transcends institutions. For the critics, the WTO is a symbol of globalization, and their fears attach also to that larger phenomenon. The first part of this paper discusses the broader issue of whether environmental goals in general are threatened by free trade and the WTO. The second half of the paper focuses exclusively on the narrower question of trade aspects of nations' efforts to implement climate change policy and whether they are likely to come into conflict with the WTO.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全球环境政策和全球贸易政策
以《京都议定书》为代表的全球气候制度可能与以世界贸易组织为代表的全球贸易政策制度发生冲突。环保人士担心,随着肮脏的生产转移到非参与国,国际贸易将削弱温室气体排放的减少,这种现象被称为泄漏。与此同时,商人们担心同样的现象会影响他们自身的竞争力。这些担忧现在已在决策过程中变得突出。2008年初,制定减少温室气体排放的长期目标的立法,包括可能对来自被认为不参与的国家的进口设置障碍的条款——无论是在华盛顿特区(法案尚未通过)还是在布鲁塞尔(欧盟委员会指令已生效)。这样的规定可能被解释为违反了世贸组织的规则,这将导致世贸组织小组拒绝一个大国的气候变化立法的噩梦。鉴于这种情况可能引发的敌意情绪,这对世贸组织和自由贸易的支持者以及《京都议定书》和环境保护的支持者来说都将是一场噩梦。这个问题只是许多环保人士担心WTO会阻碍他们实现总体目标的最新、也是最大的一个例子。这个问题超越了制度。对于批评者来说,世贸组织是全球化的象征,他们的担忧也与这个更大的现象有关。本文的第一部分讨论了更广泛的问题,即环境目标是否普遍受到自由贸易和世贸组织的威胁。论文的后半部分专门关注各国努力实施气候变化政策的贸易方面以及它们是否可能与世贸组织发生冲突的较窄问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reimagining Rights & Responsibilities in the United States: Gun Rights and Public Safety Estimating the Costs and Benefits of Supported Quarantine and Isolation in Massachusetts: The Missing Link in Covid-19 Response The Chiapas Puzzle Returnable Reciprocity: When Optional Gifts Increase Compliance The $64 Billion Massachusetts Vehicle Economy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1