IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v21y2022i5p619-632_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Border Measures, Environmental Effectiveness and WTO Law Compatibility: Is There a Way Forward for the Steel and Aluminium Climate Club?

Author

Listed:
  • Leonelli, Giulia Claudia

Abstract

With its narrow focus on price-based policies and ‘explicit’ carbon prices, the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) aims to prevent carbon leakage by ensuring that imported products ‘bear’ the same exact economic costs ‘borne’ by EU products. The proposed US border carbon adjustment (BCA) and the recent proposal for a global steel and aluminium arrangement (GSAA), by contrast, reflect a broader focus on environmental equivalence and recourse to punitive or quasi-punitive remedies. All recently proposed carbon border measures suffer from specific limitations. Further, albeit to a different extent, they are all associated with problematic aspects in terms of WTO law compatibility. This research note enquires whether the GSAA could be fine-tuned at the regulatory design stage in such a way as to provide an environmentally effective and WTO law compatible way forward. The analysis illustrates that recourse to an installation-based approach, emission limit values and product standards would achieve these goals. Nonetheless, the implementation of this ambitious strategy would be fraught with political obstacles.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonelli, Giulia Claudia, 2022. "Carbon Border Measures, Environmental Effectiveness and WTO Law Compatibility: Is There a Way Forward for the Steel and Aluminium Climate Club?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(5), pages 619-632, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:21:y:2022:i:5:p:619-632_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474745622000209/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:21:y:2022:i:5:p:619-632_5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.