IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/9869.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Barriers to Trade in Environmental Goods and Environmental Services: How Important Are They? How Much Progress at Reducing Them

Author

Listed:
  • de Melo, Jaime
  • Vijil, Mariana

Abstract

Barriers to trade in Environmental Goods (EGs) and Environmental Services (ESs) are documented for a large sample of countries and compared with barriers to trade in other goods and other services. Some progress at reduction in barriers has occurred at the national, regional and sectoral levels but not at the multilateral level where countries have been unable to agree on an approach to reduce barriers to trade. For EGs, tariffs and NTBs are highest for low-income countries and low for high-income countries. First-order estimates of the import response to a 50% reduction in tariffs for low-income countries suggest an increase in imports of around 4%. For ESs, estimates draw on the comparison of an Environment Services Liberalization index calculated across modes and services sub-sectors. The limitations of this ordinal index coupled with the inadequacy of the UN CPC list where services are defined in an exclusionary manner so that they cannot appear on two lists, casts greater uncertainty as to the informational content of the commitment measures presented here which, at best, indicate bindings on market access and national treatment rather than actual policies. It would appear nonetheless that at least as great, and probably greater commitments took place in the environmental sectors (as defined by the CPC) both multilaterally and regionally than for ?other? services with the same pattern across income groups: greater commitments observed for HIC than for MICs and LICs although it is widely recognized that GATS commitments by HICs largely amounted to consolidated members? unilateral services policies. North-South Regional Trade Agreements resulted mostly in commitments by the Southern partners indicating greater prospects for reducing barriers to trade in a regional than in a multilateral context.

Suggested Citation

  • 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," CEPR Discussion Papers 9869, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP9869
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    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. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2012. "The Geography of Conflicts and Regional Trade Agreements," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 1-35, October.
    3. Dennis Novy, 2013. "Gravity Redux: Measuring International Trade Costs With Panel Data," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 101-121, January.
    4. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2010. "Services Trade and Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 642-692, September.
    5. Roy, Martin & Marchetti, Juan & Lim, Hoe, 2006. "Services liberalization in the new generation of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs): How much further than the GATS?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2006-07, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    6. Elinor Ostrom, 2014. "A Polycentric Approach For Coping With Climate Change," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 15(1), pages 97-134, May.
    7. Sébastien Miroudot & Ben Shepherd, 2015. "Regional Trade Agreements and Trade Costs in Services," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/85, European University Institute.
    8. Antoni Estevadeordal & Caroline Freund & Emanuel Ornelas, 2008. "Does Regionalism Affect Trade Liberalization Toward Nonmembers?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1531-1575.
    9. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Steve Charnovitz & Jisun Kim, 2009. "Global Warming and the World Trading System," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4280, October.
    10. Baldwin,Richard & Haapararanta,Pertti & Kiander,Jaakko (ed.), 1995. "Expanding Membership of the European Union," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521481342.
    11. 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.
    12. Massimo Geloso Grosso, 2005. "Managing Request-Offer Negotiations under the GATS: The Case of Environmental Services," OECD Trade Policy Papers 11, OECD Publishing.
    13. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/f4rshpf3v1umfa09lb0k114o5 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Ronald Steenblik, 2005. "Liberalising Trade in 'Environmental Goods': Some Practical Considerations," OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers 2005/5, OECD Publishing.
    15. Gaëlle BALINEAU & Jaime DE MELO, 2011. "Stalemate at the Negotiations on Environmental Goods and Services at the Doha Round," Working Papers P28, FERDI.
    16. Adlung, Rudolf & Mamdouh, Hamid, 2013. "How to design trade agreements in services: Top down or bottom up?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2013-08, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    17. Maxime Kennett & Ronald Steenblik, 2005. "Environmental Goods and Services: A Synthesis of Country Studies," OECD Trade and Environment Working Papers 2005/3, OECD Publishing.
    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. 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.
    2. Jacob, Arun & Møller, Anders K, 2017. "Policy landscape of trade in environmental goods and services," MPRA Paper 78774, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. 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 P107, FERDI.
    4. Hu, Xiurong & Pollitt, Hector & Pirie, Jamie & Mercure, Jean-Francois & Liu, Junfeng & Meng, Jing & Tao, Shu, 2020. "The impacts of the trade liberalization of environmental goods on power system and CO2 emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    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. 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.
    7. Huiling Liu & Jianhua Zhang & Hongyun Huang & Haitao Wu & Yu Hao, 2023. "Environmental good exports and green total factor productivity: Lessons from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1681-1703, June.

    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. 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 P107, FERDI.
    2. Nuno Limão, 2016. "Preferential Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 22138, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Jaime de Melo & Nicole A. Mathys, 2012. "Concilier les politiques commerciales et les politiques climatiques," Revue d’économie du développement, De Boeck Université, vol. 20(2), pages 57-81.
    7. Kazunobu Hayakawa & Fukunari Kimura, 2015. "How Much Do Free Trade Agreements Reduce Impediments to Trade?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 711-729, September.
    8. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2017. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Empirical Exploration of Direct and Indirect Effects on Pollution by Country’s Trade Status," Working Papers 2017.56, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Liu, Huiling & Zhang, Jianhua & Lei, Heng, 2022. "Do imported environmental goods reduce pollution intensity? The end use matters," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Jaime DE MELO & Marcelo OLARREAGA, 2017. "Trade Related Institutions and Development," Working Papers P199, FERDI.
    11. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2012. "The ‘Emulator Effect’ Of The Uruguay Round On United States Regionalism," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 51, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    12. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    13. Chad P. Bown & Patricia Tovar, 2016. "Preferential Liberalization, Antidumping, and Safeguards: Stumbling Block Evidence from MERCOSUR," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 262-294, November.
    14. Patrick Messerlin, 2010. "Climate change and trade policy: From mutual destruction to mutual support," Working Papers hal-00972994, HAL.
    15. Baier, Scott L; Bergstrand, Jeffery H; Mariutto, Roland., 2010. "The Growth of Bilateralism," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 12, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    16. Safet KURTOVIC & Blerim HALILI & Nehat MAXHUNI, 2017. "The effect of preferential tariffs of the EU: Some evidence from B&H," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 247-262, September.
    17. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2014. "The “Emulator Effect” of the Uruguay Round on US Regionalism," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1049-1078, November.
    18. Patrick Messerlin, 2010. "Climate change and trade policy: From mutual destruction to mutual support," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqi, Sciences Po.
    19. de Melo, Jaime & Mathys, Nicole Andréa, 2012. "Reconciling Trade and Climate Policies," CEPR Discussion Papers 8760, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Jaime DE MELO, 2012. "Trade in a ‘Green Growth’ Development Strategy Global Scale Issues and Challenges," Working Papers P48, FERDI.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental goods; Environmental services; Doha round; 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:cpr:ceprdp:9869. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.