协调cbam的气候/工业相互作用:WTO的角色是什么?

IF 1.2 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AJIL Unbound Pub Date : 2022-07-18 DOI:10.1017/aju.2022.31
Ilaria Espa
{"title":"协调cbam的气候/工业相互作用:WTO的角色是什么?","authors":"Ilaria Espa","doi":"10.1017/aju.2022.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Union (EU) recently proposed the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and suddenly transformed into reality an almost two decade-long debate over the hypothetical use of CBAMs as antidotes to uneven carbon prices. The European Commission presented the scheme as a climate measure aimed at reducing the risk of carbon leakage for energy intensive and trade-exposed industries facing the cost of increased climate ambition.1 At the same time, however, it listed the mechanism among the instruments that support a “competitive [green] transition” for EU businesses in the context of the new industrial strategy supporting the EU Green Deal.2 This ambiguity risks undermining the credibility of the scheme as a legitimate climate response unless it can be shown that the equalization of carbon costs (i.e., the fair competition/industrial component) is instrumental to achieving higher emission reduction levels than could have been achieved otherwise (i.e., the carbon leakage/climate component). While the exact balance between climate- and industrial-informed features is ultimately an issue of design, this essay argues that making the scheme (as) compatible (as possible) with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) improves its environmental effectiveness and accordingly contributes to reconciling the CBAM with its stated climate purpose.","PeriodicalId":36818,"journal":{"name":"AJIL Unbound","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconciling the Climate/Industrial Interplay of CBAMs: What Role for the WTO?\",\"authors\":\"Ilaria Espa\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/aju.2022.31\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The European Union (EU) recently proposed the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and suddenly transformed into reality an almost two decade-long debate over the hypothetical use of CBAMs as antidotes to uneven carbon prices. The European Commission presented the scheme as a climate measure aimed at reducing the risk of carbon leakage for energy intensive and trade-exposed industries facing the cost of increased climate ambition.1 At the same time, however, it listed the mechanism among the instruments that support a “competitive [green] transition” for EU businesses in the context of the new industrial strategy supporting the EU Green Deal.2 This ambiguity risks undermining the credibility of the scheme as a legitimate climate response unless it can be shown that the equalization of carbon costs (i.e., the fair competition/industrial component) is instrumental to achieving higher emission reduction levels than could have been achieved otherwise (i.e., the carbon leakage/climate component). While the exact balance between climate- and industrial-informed features is ultimately an issue of design, this essay argues that making the scheme (as) compatible (as possible) with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) improves its environmental effectiveness and accordingly contributes to reconciling the CBAM with its stated climate purpose.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36818,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJIL Unbound\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJIL Unbound\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2022.31\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJIL Unbound","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2022.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

欧盟(EU)最近提议引入碳边界调整机制(CBAM),并突然将一场长达近20年的辩论变成了现实,这场辩论是关于假设使用CBAM作为不均衡碳价格的解药。欧盟委员会将该计划视为一项气候措施,旨在降低能源密集型和贸易暴露型行业面临气候雄心增加成本的碳泄漏风险。1然而,与此同时,它将该机制列为支持欧盟绿色协议的新工业战略背景下支持欧盟企业“竞争性[绿色]转型”的工具之一。2这种模糊性有可能破坏该计划作为合法气候应对措施的可信度,除非能够证明碳成本的均衡(即公平竞争/工业部分)有助于实现比其他情况下更高的减排水平(即碳泄漏/气候成分)。虽然气候和工业知情特征之间的确切平衡最终是一个设计问题,但本文认为,使该方案(尽可能)与世界贸易组织(WTO)的规则兼容,可以提高其环境有效性,从而有助于协调CBAM与其声明的气候目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reconciling the Climate/Industrial Interplay of CBAMs: What Role for the WTO?
The European Union (EU) recently proposed the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and suddenly transformed into reality an almost two decade-long debate over the hypothetical use of CBAMs as antidotes to uneven carbon prices. The European Commission presented the scheme as a climate measure aimed at reducing the risk of carbon leakage for energy intensive and trade-exposed industries facing the cost of increased climate ambition.1 At the same time, however, it listed the mechanism among the instruments that support a “competitive [green] transition” for EU businesses in the context of the new industrial strategy supporting the EU Green Deal.2 This ambiguity risks undermining the credibility of the scheme as a legitimate climate response unless it can be shown that the equalization of carbon costs (i.e., the fair competition/industrial component) is instrumental to achieving higher emission reduction levels than could have been achieved otherwise (i.e., the carbon leakage/climate component). While the exact balance between climate- and industrial-informed features is ultimately an issue of design, this essay argues that making the scheme (as) compatible (as possible) with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) improves its environmental effectiveness and accordingly contributes to reconciling the CBAM with its stated climate purpose.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJIL Unbound
AJIL Unbound Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Introduction to the Symposium on International Laws Public and Private The Private as a Core Part of International Law: The School of Salamanca, Slavery, and Marriage (Sixteenth Century) Gendering Public and Private International Law: Transversal Legal Histories of the State, Market, and the Family through Women's Private Property Rights Lawyers, Archivists, and the Turn to Transparency in the French State Foreign Relations Law as a Method of Private International Law's Theoretical Self-Reflection and Critique
×
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