China's Trade‐Off Between Economic Benefits and Sulfur Dioxide Emissions in Changing Global Trade

Abstract

China has been suffering from air quality degradation since its ascension into the World Trade Organization in 2001. The unequal exchange that occurs with international trade—that is, developed countries obtaining larger shares of trade‐related value added relative to the shares of trade‐related air pollution incurred locally—may obstruct the greening of global supply chains. In this study, we conduct a multi‐regional input‐output analysis to examine the change in the distribution of economic benefits and sulfur dioxide emissions underlying China's international trade from 2002 to 2015. The results show that both net trade‐related economic benefits and SO2 emissions in China rapidly increased from 2002 to 2007 and then decelerated after 2007 due to changes in China's green development strategy. In the past 13 years, China has suffered from economic‐environmental inequality due to trade with most developed countries, for example, the United States, the European Union, East Asia, and Canada. East Asia, particularly Japan and South Korea, became both an economic and environmental winner while trading with China in 2015. China has also outsourced emissions to less developed regions, such as Sub‐Saharan Africa. We propose policy implications to further reduce the economic‐environmental inequality underlying China's international trade.

Worsening Carbon Inequality Embodied in Trade within China

“…Thus, the carbon inequality issue should be analyzed based on a consumption perspective. Based on that, plenty of studies revealed the CO 2 transfer quantity and directions embodied in trade from both national scale − and subnational scale. ,− However, as a key factor in the trade process, the economic gain (value-added) was seldom analyzed accompanied by carbon transfer. , The inequality issue has also been quantitatively measured using multiple approaches. Wang et al constructed an environmental inequality indicator similar to the Pollution Terms of Trade (PTT) to examine the change of economic benefits and sulfur dioxide emissions underlying China’s international trade from 2002 to 2015.…”

Multi‐Region Multi‐Sector Contributions to Drivers of Air Pollution in China

“…Given the large variations between Chinese regions or sectors, the contributions of drivers to emissions change were evaluated for some specific regions or sectors, such as coal‐fired power plants (Li et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2019), iron and steel industry (Mao et al., 2013), industrial sector (Hang et al., 2019; Liu & Wang, 2017a; W. Zhang et al., 2015), and the three key regions (i.e., the Beijing‐Tianjin‐Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta region, and the Pearl River Delta region) where Air Pollution and Control Action Plan promulgated in 2013 focused on (Q. Zhang et al., 2019). Recognizing the emission reduction potential from a consumption perspective, some studies also focus on the air pollution emissions transfer (Huo et al., 2014; Li et al., 2019; Liu & Wang, 2015, 2017b; Y. Lu et al., 2019; H. Wang et al., 2017; Yang, Zhang, Fan, Li, & Meng, 2018; Yang, Zhang, Fan, Yu, & Zhao, 2018; H. Y. Zhao et al., 2015), inequity (F. Wang et al., 2020; X. Yang et al., 2019; Zhang, Liu, et al., 2018; Zhang, Wang, et al., 2018), and drivers induced by international and inter‐regional trade (Chen et al., 2020; Guan et al., 2014).…”

The true cost of trade among neighbors: the role of Japanese imports in waste generation in China

“…Unlike CO 2 emissions but like SO 2 emissions, waste generation tends to cause environmental issues in the country where it is generated. It would not be surprising if a similar argument could be made with regard to waste as that of Wang et al (2020). There is no doubt that the environmental problems currently facing China are serious.…”

“…Even with the inducement to China of final demand exports from China to Japan of 513 billion USD in production value, China's cost to address environmental issues caused by the induced waste generation seems be too much to make this worthwhile. Wang et al (2020) argued that there is a trade-off between economic benefits and sulphur dioxide emissions embodied in global trade, emphasizing the inequality with developed countries. Unlike CO 2 emissions but like SO 2 emissions, waste generation tends to cause environmental issues in the country where it is generated.…”

“…For example, Streets et al (2006) reported the extent of export-related emissions of primary SO 2 , NOx, respirable suspended particulates (RSP) and volatile organic compositions (VOC) in the Pearl River Delta Economic Zone (PRDEZ). Wang et al (2020) conducted a multi-regional input-output analysis to estimate SO 2 emissions embodied in China's international trade. Similarly, numerous researchers have investigated the effects of exports from China to other countries and the GHG emissions and energy consumption embodied in trade from China (Chen & Zhang, 2010;Gregg et al, 2008;Guan et al, 2009;Lin & Polenske, 1995;Peters et al, 2007;Peters & Hertwich, 2008;Weber et al, 2008;Zhang et al, 2015a).…”