AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.5 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Publishing Language: Chinese

EU carbon border adjustment mechanism and international industrial landscape: Impact assessment based on a global computable general equilibrium model

Bixiong LUO1Alun GU2,3Xiangdong CHEN4Peng ZUO4Yuyan WENG2,3( )Yiming CHEN5
China Power Engineering Consulting Group Co., Ltd., Beijing 100120, China
Institute of Energy, Environment and Economy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
China Power Engineering Consulting Group International Engineering Co., Ltd., Beijing 100013, China
China Forestry Group Corporation, Beijing 100036, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

The legislative process for the European Union (EU)'s carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) has been completed, and it officially became EU law in May 2023. The EU's CBAM imposes charges on imported products from selected industries based on their carbon emissions and the prevailing carbon prices in the EU emissions trading system through the issuance of "CBAM certificates." Considering the intensified global competition in low-carbon development and the profound changes in the geopolitical energy landscape, the implementation of the EU's CBAM as a unilateral trade measure will have an impact on the global economy, trade, and industry, making it a focal point in the competition among major powers in the long run. Existing studies focus more on the impact of the EU's CBAM on exports and pay less attention to the changes in the international industrial landscape caused by the industrial output changes due to the implementation of the EU's CBAM. Furthermore, most existing studies primarily performed static analysis for the benchmark year and failed to capture the impact of cumulative changes over time and the evolution of CBAM rules on the future economy, trade, and industry. Limited analysis exists on the dynamic effects of the EU's CBAM. In addition, most studies exogenously assume carbon prices, unable to simulate the endogenous trends of carbon prices and their impacts within major economies under the latest low-carbon transition policies.

Methods

This research employs the China-in-global energy model (C-GEM) developed by Tsinghua University to simulate and analyze the impact of the EU's CBAM. C-GEM is a computable general equilibrium model that effectively represents the interlinkages and interactions between different sectors of the economy and the energy system, allowing the assessment of the economic impact of climate policies on major economies. C-GEM is a global multiregional model that can evaluate the effects of the EU's CBAM on the EU and other economies while analyzing the changes in the global industrial landscape from a global perspective. Furthermore, C-GEM is a recursive dynamic model that can simulate the medium- and long-term emissions reduction targets of various economies and analyze the future implications of the EU's CBAM. The EU's CBAM is depicted in the model as follows: First, the CBAM tax rates are calculated based on value-at-the-border, using the value-based carbon intensity, trade values, and endogenous carbon prices from the C-GEM. Second, these tax rates are applied to the EU's import sectors in the model. Finally, the EU's CBAM is made dynamic, and assumptions are made regarding the covered sectors, sectoral coverage ratios, emission types, and other factors at different time points.

Results

The simulated results from the C-GEM revealed the following: (1) Due to the substantial exports of steel and other products to the EU, Russia was heavily affected, with projected GDP changes of -0.12% and -0.32% in 2025 and 2030, respectively, while the EU increased its GDP by producing substitute domestic products. (2) Russia experienced the largest decline in total exports, with projected changes of -0.86% and -2.48% in 2025 and 2030, respectively, while the EU considerably benefited from the exports of specific industries related to the CBAM. (3) The output of industries such as steel, nonmetallic minerals, nonferrous metals, and chemicals in economies such as Russia, Turkey, and China experienced varying degrees of decline, with the chemical and steel industries being more affected than others. (4) The international market shares of key industries in developing economies like Russia and China mostly declined, replaced by increased market share for related industries in developed economies such as the EU. The percentage increase in the EU's market share considerably exceeded the percentage decrease in other economies. However, China's nonferrous metals industry exhibited a trend of further increasing its international market share, reflecting its competitive advantage.

Conclusions

Implementing the EU's CBAM showed heterogeneous impacts on various economies at different times and reshaped the existing international industrial landscape. There is a trend of global key industry output shifting from developing economies with a high dependence on carbon-intensive product exports to developed or more competitive developing economies. To respond to the EU's CBAM, China needs to strengthen multilateral cooperation and proactively address the unilateral trade measures taken by EU and the United States, optimize industrial and trade structures and promote green and low-carbon development, accelerate the development of the national carbon market and improve domestic carbon pricing mechanisms, and actively participate in the formulation of international standards and rules in the areas of climate change and trade.

CLC number: F745.0 Document code: A Article ID: 1000-0054(2024)08-1492-10

References

[1]

HE J K. New situation of global climate governance and China's countermeasures[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics, 2019, 4(3): 1-9. (in Chinese)

[2]

WANG H L, HUANG X D, ZHAO X F, et al. Key problems in global climate governance and China's countermeasures[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2020, 30(11): 26-33. (in Chinese)

[3]

BABIKER M H. Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage[J]. Journal of international Economics, 2005, 65(2): 421-445.

[4]
European Council, Council of the European Union. Fit for 55. (2021-07-14). https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/green-deal/fit-for-55-the-eu-plan-for-a-green-transition/.
[5]
European Commission. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a carbon border adjustment mechanism. (2021-07-14). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52021PC0564.
[6]

WANG M, JI Z X, KANG W M, et al. Key points and impact of EU's "carbon border adjustment mechanism" and China's responses[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31(12): 45-52. (in Chinese)

[7]

BÖHRINGER C, FISCHER C, ROSENDAHL K E, et al. Potential impacts and challenges of border carbon adjustments[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2022, 12(1): 22-29.

[8]

HU X H. The EU aviation emissions trading system and its implications[J]. Studies in Law and Business, 2011, 28(5): 145-151. (in Chinese)

[9]

ZHANG Z P. International regulation of aviation carbon emissions and the trading: Starting with the EU aviation carbon emissions case[J]. Global Law Review, 2013, 35(1): 168-176. (in Chinese)

[10]

BAO Q, TANG L, YANG L X. The impact of carbon motivated border tax on China: An analysis based on computable general equilibrium model[J]. Management Review, 2010, 22(6): 24-33. (in Chinese)

[11]

ZHANG Z X. The U.S. proposed carbon tariffs, WTO scrutiny and China's responses[J]. International Economics and Economic Policy, 2010, 7(2): 203-225.

[12]

XIE L H, MU F T. America waved its "carbon tariff" stick, aimed at China?[J]. World Environment, 2009(4): 69-72. (in Chinese)

[13]

HAN L Q. The background and impact of EU carbon border adjustment mechanism[J]. Contemporary International Relations, 2021(5): 51-59, 61. (in Chinese)

[14]

HELM D, HEPBURN C, RUTA G. Trade, climate change, and the political game theory of border carbon adjustments[J]. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 2012, 28(2): 368-394.

[15]

WU C X. Political economy analysis of border adjustment policy under carbon reduction targets[J]. Theory Journal, 2016(3): 68-73. (in Chinese)

[16]
United Nations. United Nations framework convention on climate change. (1992-05-09). https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf.
[17]

HOLZER K. Carbon-related border adjustment and WTO law[M]. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014.

[18]

LIN B Q, LI A J. Is carbon motivated border tax justifiable?[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2012, 47(11): 118-127. (in Chinese)

[19]

LI X L, CHEN Y S. Study on the compliance of "carbon tariffs" with WTO rules[J]. Journal of International Economic Cooperation, 2010(3): 77-81. (in Chinese)

[20]
PAUWELYN J, KLEIMANN D. Trade related aspects of a carbon border adjustment mechanism: A legal assessment[R]. Belgium: European Union, Policy Department, Directorate- General for External Policies, 2020.
[21]

AN Q. The adaptability of the carbon border adjustment mechanism & WTO rule and its enlightenment[J]. International Petroleum Economics, 2020, 28(11): 10-13. (in Chinese)

[22]

LIU B, ZHAO F. The impact of EU carbon tariff policy on China's export and suggestions for China[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2021, 36(6): 185-194, 210. (in Chinese)

[23]

XU Y M, LI X Y. The impact of the EU's CBAM on China-EU's trade and China's countermeasures[J]. Journal of International Economic Cooperation, 2021(5): 25-32. (in Chinese)

[24]

ZHANG Z X. China and the world under the targets of carbon peak and carbon neutralization: Green low-carbon transformation, green finance, carbon market and carbon border adjustment mechanism[J]. Frontiers, 2021(14): 69-79. (in Chinese)

[25]

BÖHRINGER C, BALISTRERI E J, RUTHERFORD T F. The role of border carbon adjustment in unilateral climate policy: Overview of an energy modeling forum study (EMF 29)[J]. Energy Economics, 2012, 34(S2): S97-S110.

[26]

KORTUM S, WEISBACH D. The design of border adjustments for carbon prices[J]. National Tax Journal, 2017, 70(2): 421-446.

[27]

MEHLING M A, VAN ASSELT H, DAS K, et al. Designing border carbon adjustments for enhanced climate action[J]. American Journal of International Law, 2019, 113(3): 433-481.

[28]
European Commission. Inception impact assessment. (2020-07-01). https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/07/CBAM.pdf.
[29]
XIE C, PENG W S. Quantitative analysis of the impact of the EU's carbon border adjustment mechanism on China's economy and global carbon emission reduction[R]. Beijing: China International Capital Corporation Limited Global Institute, 2021. (in Chinese)
[30]

ZHONG J R, PEI J S. Beggar thy neighbor? On the competitiveness and welfare impacts of the EU's proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism[J]. Energy Policy, 2022, 162: 112802.

[31]

BELLORA C, FONTAGNÉ L. EU in search of a carbon border adjustment mechanism[J]. Energy Economics, 2023, 123: 106673.

[32]
CLAUSING K A, WOLFRAM C. Carbon border adjustments, climate clubs, and subsidy races when climate policies vary[R]. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2023.
[33]
HE X B, ZHAI F, MA J. The global impact of a carbon border adjustment mechanism: A quantitative assessment. (2022-03-11). https://en.nsd.pku.edu.cn/docs/20220329114245125696.pdf.
[34]

PERDANA S, VIELLE M. Making the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism acceptable and climate friendly for least developed countries[J]. Energy Policy, 2022, 170, 113245.

[35]

RAMADHANI D P, KOO Y. Comparative analysis of carbon border tax adjustment and domestic carbon tax under general equilibrium model: Focusing on the Indonesian economy[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 377: 134288.

[36]

PANG J, CHANG Y H. Influence of carbon border adjustment mechanism and China's countermeasures[J]. China Sustainability Tribune, 2023(S1): 32-35. (in Chinese)

[37]

LI J F, ZHANG Y X. A quantitative analysis on economic impact of potential green barrier of international trade for China: Case study of carbon tariff with SIC-GE Model[J]. Journal of International Trade, 2012(5): 105-118. (in Chinese)

[38]

SHEN K T, LI G. The impacts of carbon-motivated border tax adjustment to China's industrial exports: A CGE based analysis[J]. Finance & Trade Economics, 2010(1): 75-82, 136-137. (in Chinese)

[39]

YUAN Y. CGE model-based quantitative analysis of the impact of carbon tariffs on Chinese economy[J]. Journal of International Trade, 2013(2): 92-99. (in Chinese)

[40]

SHEN K T. The international carbon-motivated border tax adjustment controversy and its impact on China's manufacturing industries[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2010(1): 65-74. (in Chinese)

[41]
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. A European Union carbon border adjustment mechanism: Implications for developing countries. (2021-07-14). https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/osginf2021d2_en.pdf.
[42]

BRANGER F, QUIRION P. Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies[J]. Ecological Economics, 2014, 99: 29-39.

[43]

LARCH M, WANNER J. Carbon tariffs: An analysis of the trade, welfare, and emission effects[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2017, 109: 195-213.

[44]

CLORA F, YU W S, CORONG E. Alternative carbon border adjustment mechanisms in the European Union and international responses: Aggregate and within-coalition results[J]. Energy Policy, 2023, 174: 113454.

[45]
QI T Y, WINCHESTER N, ZHANG D, et al. The China-in-Global energy model[R]. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2014.
[46]

WENG Y Y, ZHANG D, LU L L, et al. A general equilibrium analysis of floor prices for China's national carbon emissions trading system[J]. Climate Policy, 2018, 18(S1): 60-70.

[47]

QI T Y, WENG Y Y. Economic impacts of an international carbon market in achieving the INDC targets[J]. Energy, 2016, 109: 886-893.

[48]
WENG Y Y. Study on the role of the carbon market in global carbon dioxide mitigation[D]. Beijing: Tsinghua University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[49]

AGUIAR A, CHEPELIEV M, CORONG E L, et al. The GTAP data base: Version 10[J]. Journal of Global Economic Analysis, 2019, 4(1): 1-27.

Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology)
Pages 1492-1501
Cite this article:
LUO B, GU A, CHEN X, et al. EU carbon border adjustment mechanism and international industrial landscape: Impact assessment based on a global computable general equilibrium model. Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), 2024, 64(8): 1492-1501. https://doi.org/10.16511/j.cnki.qhdxxb.2023.26.050

175

Views

16

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics

Received: 05 June 2023
Published: 15 August 2024
© Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology). All rights reserved.
Return