IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2014.70.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Critical Mass Approach to Achieve a Deal on Green Goods and Services: What is on the Table? How Much to Expect?

Author

Listed:
  • Jaime de Melo

    (Fondation pour les Etudes et Recherches sur le Développement International (FERDI))

  • Mariana Vijil

    (DG Treasury, French Ministry for the Economy and Finance and FERDI)

Abstract

At the Davos forum of January 2014, a group of 14 countries pledged to launch negotiations on liberalising trade in ‘green goods’ (also known as `environmental goods’(EGs)), focussing on the elimination of tariffs for an ‘APEC list’ of 54 products. The paper shows that the ‘Davos group’, with an average tariff of 1.8%, has little to offer as countries have avoided submitting products with tariffs peaks for tariff reductions. Even if the list were extended to the 411 products on the ‘WTO list’, taking into account tariff dispersion, their tariff structure on EGs would be equivalent to a uniform tariff of 3.4%, about half the uniform tariff-equivalent for non EGs products. Enlarging the number of participants to low-income countries might be possible as, on average, their imports would not increase by more than 8 percent. However, because of the strong complementarities between trade in Environmental Goods and trade in Environmental Services, these should also be brought to the negotiation table even though difficulties in reaching agreement on their scope are likely to be great

Suggested Citation

  • Jaime de Melo & Mariana Vijil, 2014. "The Critical Mass Approach to Achieve a Deal on Green Goods and Services: What is on the Table? How Much to Expect?," Working Papers 2014.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2014.70
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2014-070.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hiau LooiKee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, January.
    2. de Melo, Jaime & Vijil, Mariana, 2014. "Barriers to Trade in Environmental Goods and Environmental Services: How Important Are They? How Much Progress at Reducing Them?," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 172425, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2010. "Services Trade and Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 642-692, September.
    4. Marchetti, Juan A. & Roy, Martin, 2013. "The Tisa initiative: An overview of market access issues," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2013-11, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    5. Balineau, Gaã‹Lle & De Melo, Jaime, 2013. "Removing barriers to trade on environmental goods: an appraisal," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 693-718, October.
    6. Miroudot, Sã‰Bastien & Sauvage, Jehan & Shepherd, Ben, 2013. "Measuring the cost of international trade in services," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 719-735, October.
    7. Massimo Geloso Grosso, 2005. "Managing Request-Offer Negotiations under the GATS: The Case of Environmental Services," OECD Trade Policy Papers 11, OECD Publishing.
    8. Ronald Steenblik, 2005. "Liberalising Trade in 'Environmental Goods': Some Practical Considerations," OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers 2005/5, OECD Publishing.
    9. Gaëlle BALINEAU & Jaime DE MELO, 2011. "Stalemate at the Negotiations on Environmental Goods and Services at the Doha Round," Working Papers P28, FERDI.
    10. Sébastien Miroudot & Ben Shepherd, 2015. "Regional Trade Agreements and Trade Costs in Services," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/85, European University Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jaime de Melo & Jean-Marc Solleder, 2019. "The role of an Environmental Goods Agreement in the quest to improve the regime complex for climate change," Working Papers hal-02394536, HAL.
    2. Lili Yan Ing & Ralf Peters & Olivier Cadot, 2019. "Regional Integration and NTM in ASEAN," Books, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), number 2019-regional_integration, July.

    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. de Melo, Jaime & Vijil, Mariana, 2014. "Barriers to Trade in Environmental Goods and Environmental Services: How Important Are They? How Much Progress at Reducing Them?," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 172425, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2018. "The impact of trade in environmental goods on pollution: what are we learning from the transition economies’ experience?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(4), pages 785-827, October.
    3. Julien Gooris & Cristina Mitaritonna, 2015. "Which import restrictions matter for trade in services ?," Working Papers 2015-33, CEPII research center.
    4. Lili Yan Ing & Ralf Peters & Olivier Cadot, 2019. "Regional Integration and NTM in ASEAN," Books, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), number 2019-regional_integration, July.
    5. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2016. "Trade in environmental goods and sustainable development: What are we learning from the transition economies’ experience?," Working Papers 2016.16, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    6. Edward J. Balistreri & Zoryana Olekseyuk & David G. Tarr, 2017. "Privatisation and the unusual case of Belarusian accession to the WTO," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(12), pages 2564-2591, December.
    7. Milena Kern & Jörg Paetzold & Hannes Winner, 2021. "Cutting red tape for trade in services," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(10), pages 2858-2886, October.
    8. Carmine Ornaghi & Ilke Van Beveren & Stijn Vanormelingen, 2021. "The impact of service and goods offshoring on employment: Firm‐level evidence," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 677-711, May.
    9. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2013. "Estimating Effects of Price-Distorting Policies Using Alternative Distortions Databases," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 877-931, Elsevier.
    10. Peter Egger & Anirudh Shingal, 2021. "Determinants of services trade agreement membership," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 157(1), pages 21-64, February.
    11. Bernard Hoekman & Ben Shepherd, 2017. "Services Productivity, Trade Policy and Manufacturing Exports," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 499-516, March.
    12. Nelgen, Signe & Anderson, Kym, 2011. "Projecting agricultural distortions for a 2030 GTAP database," Conference papers 332094, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    13. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2019. "Trade in Environmental Goods and Air Pollution: A Mediation Analysis to Estimate Total, Direct and Indirect Effects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1125-1162, November.
    14. Erik der Marel & Sébastien Miroudot, 2014. "The economics and political economy of going beyond the GATS," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 205-239, June.
    15. Egger, Peter & MILE 02, Anirudh Shingal, 2014. "Determinants of services trade agreements," Papers 721, World Trade Institute.
    16. Roy, Martin, 2017. "The contribution of services trade policies to connectivity in the context of aid for trade," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2017-12, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    17. Catherine Boulatoff & Talan B. İşcan & Yulia Kotlyarova, 2022. "Does Distance Matter for Trade in Services? The Case of Interprovincial Trade in Canada," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 157-185, February.
    18. Edward J Balistreri & Maryla Maliszewska & Israel Osorio-Rodarte & David G Tarr & Hidemichi Yonezawa, 2018. "Poverty, Welfare and Income Distribution Implications of Reducing Trade Costs Through Deep Integration in Eastern and Southern Africa," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 27(2), pages 172-200.
    19. Pierre Sauvé & Anirudh Shingal, 2016. "Why Do Economies Enter into Preferential Agreements on Trade in Services? Assessing the Potential for Negotiated Regulatory Convergence in Asian Services Markets," Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 33(1), pages 56-73, March.
    20. Zugravu-Soilita, Natalia, 2017. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Empirical Exploration of Direct and Indirect Effects on Pollution by Country’s Trade Status," EIA: Climate Change: Economic Impacts and Adaptation 266287, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Goods; Environmental Services; Doha Round; APEC; Davos Initiative; Tariff Reductions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F18 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade and Environment
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fem:femwpa:2014.70. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.