IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332677.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Emissions Leakage, Environmental Policy and Trade Frictions

Author

Listed:
  • Holladay, J. Scott
  • Mohsin, Mohammed
  • Pradhan, Shreekar

Abstract

We develop a two-good general equilibrium model of a small open economy to decompose effects of a unilateral strengthening of environmental policy in a country on pollution emissions in the rest of the world, known as emissions leakage. We show analytically and numerically that the level of emissions leakage crucially depends upon the level of trade frictions in the service sector. In the model, production in the manufacturing sector is associated with pollution emissions and production in the service sector is clean. We solve for the amount of leakage from a small strengthening in environmental regulation. In a special case with free trade in manufacturing and no trade in services there is no leakage. Allowing for trade in services, we analytically solve for three effects of environmental regulation on emissions leakage: income, output and terms of trade. The income effect generates negative leakage while the output and terms of trade effects generate positive leakage. We solve for the relationship between trade frictions in the service sector and leakage, and show that at lower levels of service sector trade friction, leakage from a small strengthening of environmental regulation decreases (increases) if services are imported (exported). Finally, we calibrate the model to the Canadian economy to estimate relative sizes of these effects. We find that leakage is about eighteen percent lower when using trade friction levels estimated from the literature rather than assuming no trade frictions in services.

Suggested Citation

  • Holladay, J. Scott & Mohsin, Mohammed & Pradhan, Shreekar, 2016. "Emissions Leakage, Environmental Policy and Trade Frictions," Conference papers 332677, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332677
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332677/files/7833.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sergey V. Paltsev, 2001. "The Kyoto Protocol: Regional and Sectoral Contributions to the Carbon Leakage," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 53-80.
    2. Konstantinos Angelopoulos & George Economides & Apostolis Philippopoulos, 2010. "What is the best environmental policy?Taxes, permits and rules under economic and environmental uncertainty," Working Papers 119, Bank of Greece.
    3. Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael, 2011. "Emissions targets and the real business cycle: Intensity targets versus caps or taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 352-366.
    4. Kathy Baylis & Don Fullerton & Daniel H. Karney, 2013. "Leakage, Welfare, and Cost-Effectiveness of Carbon Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 332-337, May.
    5. Felder Stefan & Rutherford Thomas F., 1993. "Unilateral CO2 Reductions and Carbon Leakage: The Consequences of International Trade in Oil and Basic Materials," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 162-176, September.
    6. Arik Levinson, 2010. "Pollution and international trade in services," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 93-105, June.
    7. Copeland, Brian R. & Taylor, M. Scott, 2005. "Free trade and global warming: a trade theory view of the Kyoto protocol," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 205-234, March.
    8. Keith Walsh, 2006. "Trade in Services: Does Gravity Hold? A Gravity Model Approach to Estimating Barriers to Services Trade," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp183, IIIS.
    9. Jared C. Carbone, 2013. "Linking Numerical and Analytical Models of Carbon Leakage," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 326-331, May.
    10. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
    11. Sébastien Miroudot & Ben Shepherd, 2014. "The Paradox of ‘Preferences’: Regional Trade Agreements and Trade Costs in Services," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(12), pages 1751-1772, December.
    12. Anderson, James & Milot, Catherine & Yotov, Yoto, 2012. "How Much Does Geography Deflect Services Trade?," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2012-5, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    13. Gervais, Antoine & Jensen, J. Bradford, 2019. "The tradability of services: Geographic concentration and trade costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 331-350.
    14. Hoel, Michael, 1996. "Should a carbon tax be differentiated across sectors?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-32, January.
    15. Copeland Brian R., 1994. "International Trade and the Environment: Policy Reform in a Polluted Small Open Economy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 44-65, January.
    16. Fugazza, Marco & Maur, Jean-Christophe, 2008. "Non-tariff barriers in CGE models: How useful for policy?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 475-490.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Holladay, J. Scott & Mohsin, Mohammed & Pradhan, Shreekar, 2018. "Emissions leakage, environmental policy and trade frictions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 95-113.
    2. Kathy Baylis & Don Fullerton & Daniel H. Karney, 2014. "Negative Leakage," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 51-73.
    3. Jakob, Michael, 2021. "Climate policy and international trade – A critical appraisal of the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    4. Michael Jakob & Jan Christoph Steckel & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2014. "Consumption- Versus Production-Based Emission Policies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 297-318, October.
    5. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2011. "Carbon Leakage, The Green Paradox, And Perfect Future Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(3), pages 767-805, August.
    6. Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 2012. "Competitiveness and Leakage Concerns and Border Carbon Adjustments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 225-287, December.
    7. Elliott, Joshua & Fullerton, Don, 2014. "Can a unilateral carbon tax reduce emissions elsewhere?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 6-21.
    8. van der Werf, Edwin & Di Maria, Corrado, 2012. "Imperfect Environmental Policy and Polluting Emissions: The Green Paradox and Beyond," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(2), pages 153-194, March.
    9. Bin Fan & Yun Zhang & Xiuzhen Li & Xiao Miao, 2019. "Trade Openness and Carbon Leakage: Empirical Evidence from China’s Industrial Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Christian Beermann, 2015. "Climate Policy and the Intertemporal Supply of Fossil Resources," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 62.
    11. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2013. "Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 299-311.
    12. Wu, Libo & Zhou, Ying & Qian, Haoqi, 2022. "Global actions under the Paris agreement: Tracing the carbon leakage flow and pursuing countermeasures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    13. Tan, Xiujie & Liu, Yu & Cui, Jingbo & Su, Bin, 2018. "Assessment of carbon leakage by channels: An approach combining CGE model and decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 535-545.
    14. Li, Aijun & Du, Nan & Wei, Qian, 2014. "The cross-country implications of alternative climate policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 155-163.
    15. Gabriela Michalek & Reimund Schwarze, 2015. "Carbon leakage: pollution, trade or politics?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1471-1492, December.
    16. repec:old:wpaper:340 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Thomas Grebel, 2019. "What a difference carbon leakage correction makes!," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 939-971, July.
    18. Shreekar Pradhan & J. Scott Holladay & Mohammed Mohsin & Shreekar Pradhan, 2015. "Environmental Policy Instruments and Uncertainties Under Free Trade and Capital Mobility," EcoMod2015 8102, EcoMod.
    19. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2012. "The effectiveness of anti-leakage policies in the European Union: results for Austria," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 233-260, May.
    21. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.

    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:ags:pugtwp:332677. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.