Sun Xinlu, Mi Zhifu, Cheng Lu, Coffman D'Maris, Liu Yu
The Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, United Kingdom.
College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.
Fundam Res. 2023 Mar 30;4(3):660-670. doi: 10.1016/j.fmre.2023.02.026. eCollection 2024 May.
The European Commission has proposed a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to reduce carbon leakage and create a level playing field for its domestic products and imported goods. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the proposal remains unclear, especially when it triggers threats of retaliation from trading partners of the European Union. We apply a Computable General Equilibrium model - Global Trade Analysis Project - to assess the economic and environmental impacts of different CBAM schemes. Here we show that the effectiveness of the CBAM to address carbon leakage risks is rather limited, and the CBAM raises concerns over global welfare costs, Correct to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) losses, and violation of equality principles. Trade retaliation leads to multiplied welfare losses, which would mostly be borne by poor countries. Our results question the carbon leakage reduction effect of a unilateral trade policy and suggest that climate change mitigation still needs to be performed within the framework of international cooperation.
欧盟委员会提出了一项碳边境调整机制（CBAM），以减少碳泄漏，并为其国内产品和进口商品创造一个公平的竞争环境。然而，该提案的有效性仍不明确，尤其是当它引发欧盟贸易伙伴的报复威胁时。我们应用一个可计算一般均衡模型——全球贸易分析项目——来评估不同碳边境调整机制方案的经济和环境影响。我们在此表明，碳边境调整机制应对碳泄漏风险的有效性相当有限，而且碳边境调整机制引发了对全球福利成本、占国内生产总值（GDP）损失比例以及违反平等原则的担忧。贸易报复会导致福利损失成倍增加，而这些损失大多将由贫穷国家承担。我们的结果对单边贸易政策减少碳泄漏的效果提出了质疑，并表明缓解气候变化仍需在国际合作框架内进行。
