IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/pbrief/pb21-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can EU carbon border adjustment measures propel WTO climate talks?

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Clyde Hufbauer

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Jisun Kim (POSCO Research Institute

    (POSCO Research Institute)

  • Jeffrey J. Schott

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

Reforms proposed in the European Union’s "Fit for 55" climate policy package are likely to sharply increase the cost paid by European firms for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Recognizing that increased carbon prices would put European firms at a disadvantage in competing with imports from countries that produce without incurring these costs, the European Commission has proposed a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) requiring that the most carbon-intensive EU imports either incur comparable carbon charges as EU firms or pay the equivalent of a carbon-based tariff. The CBAM aims to deter carbon leakage, which could arise if firms shift carbon-intensive production out of Europe to facilities in countries that do not tax GHG emissions (or tax at a low rate) and then export the goods to Europe. European production and output would suffer and global climate efforts to reduce GHG emissions would be undercut. The loftier goal is to encourage other countries to follow the European example and strengthen their own national decarbonization policies, which in turn would exempt their goods from CBAM charges. The CBAM would cover five carbon-intensive industries: iron and steel, aluminum, fertilizer, electricity, and cement. Countries most affected by the CBAM include Russia, China, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, South Korea, and India. Some are likely to contest the policy, claiming that the CBAM is a unilateral measure that violates World Trade Organization rules and bolsters protectionism while hampering rather than encouraging efforts in other countries to tackle climate change. A better and more feasible approach would be adoption of a CBAM moratorium while negotiations are conducted to promote carbon abatement policies that comply with the rules-based global trading system.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jisun Kim (POSCO Research Institute & Jeffrey J. Schott, 2021. "Can EU carbon border adjustment measures propel WTO climate talks?," Policy Briefs PB21-23, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb21-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/can-eu-carbon-border-adjustment-measures-propel-wto-climate-talks
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Höslinger, Emilie & Redl, Sebastian & Bittó, Virág, 2022. "Analyse des Vorschlags der EU-Kommission zur Einführung eines CO2 Grenzausgleichs "CBAM"," Policy Notes 49, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    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:iie:pbrief:pb21-23. 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: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.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.