China’s trade in climate smart goods: an analysis of trends and trading patterns
- Author(s)
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ee.09(3).2018.02
-
Article InfoVolume 9 2018, Issue #3, pp. 12-22
- Cited by
- 1031 Views
-
194 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Trade and investment have positive effects on economic growth and development, especially for developing countries, where trade openness could play a crucial role to eliminate poverty. But in the same way trade and investment can also harm the environment by producing GHG, pollutions and other environmental negative externalities. Since economic development, trade and environment are elaborately interconnected, it is indispensable to amalgamate environmentally affiliated issues on the development agenda. With expansion of economic activities and trade on the one hand and consequent threats to the environment on the other, the question of environment-friendly trade has emerged as a serious policy agenda in recent years. In that context, trade in climate smart goods (CSGs) is assumed to play a significant role in promoting sustainable development pathway. Given that China’s global trade is expanding at an unprecedented scale, the present paper is designed to analyze the trends and trading patterns of China’s trade in CSGs with the rest of the world. Based on the collected data covering the period of 1992 to 2016 from UN Comtrade, the analyses indicate that total trade in CSGs by China has been increasing, but its share in total trade volume is still very low. It is understood that China’s exports and imports of CSGs are dominated by a few products, namely photosensitive semiconductor devices (854,140), static converters (850,440), articles of plastic and arts of other material (392,690), photovoltaic system controller (853,710), discharge lamps, fluorescent (853,931), parts of electric motors, generators, generating sets and rotary converters (850,300), machine and mechanical appliance (847,989), other lead-acid accumulators (850,720), prism, mirrors and other optical elements unmounted (900,190), cooking appliances and plate warmers (732,111), gears and gearing, other than toothed wheels (848,340), other machinery, plant and equipment (841,989), filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus for gases (842,139), etc. While the major trading partners of China for CSGs are the USA, Japan, India, Malaysia, Germany, Korea Republic, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, Russia, Brazil, Australia, Pakistan, Israel, among others.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)F18, F63, F64, O44
-
References24
-
Tables2
-
Figures8
-
- Fig. 1. Total trade and total CSGs trade in China (USD mln)
- Fig. 2. China’s export values with the rest of the world (USD mln)
- Fig. 3. China’s import values with the rest of the world (USD mln)
- Fig. 4. A comparison of China’s total trade with trade in CSGs (USD mln)
- Fig. 5. Export and import values of the top ten CSGs by China (USD thousand)
- Fig. 6. Year-wise export values (in thousand, USD) of the top ten CSGs by China (1992 to 2016)
- Fig. 7. Year-wise import values (in thousand, USD) of the top ten CSGs by China (1992 to 2016)
- Fig. 8. Comparison between total CSGs EX-IM Values and top ten CSGs EX-IM values (in thousand, USD) in China for the study period
-
- Table 1. China’s total trade and trade in climate smart goods (USD mln)
- Table 2. China’s trade balance with the rest of the world (USD mln)
-
- Antweiler, W., Copeland, B., & Taylor, M. S. (1998). Is free trade good for the environment? American Economic Review, 91(4), 877˗908.
- Beghin, J., & Potier, M. (1997). Effects of trade liberalization on the environment in the manufacturing sector. World Economy, 20(4), 435˗456.
- Chowdhury, T. & Islam, N. A K M (2014). India’s trade in climate smart goods: an analysis of trends and trading patterns. International Journal of Development Studies and Research, 3(4), 36˗52.
- Crowford, J. (2011). Promoting trade and investment in climate smart goods, services and technologies in Asia and the Pacific. United Nations 2011.
- Chai, H. C. J. (2000). Economics, ecology and the environment (Working paper No. 42). The University of Queensland.
- Dean, J. M. (1999). Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test. SAIS, Johns Hopkins University. Washington D. C.
- Dasgupta, S., Huq, M., & Wheeler, D. (2002). Bending the rules: discretionary pollution control in China. Manuscript.
- Duy, N. L. (2010). The impact of trade liberalization on the environment in some East Asian countries: an empirical study. CARE 2260 EMR, Faculty of Laws, Economics and Management, University of Rouen.
- ICT (2014). Trade in environmental goods and services: opportunities and challenges.
- Jha, V. (2008). Environmental priorities and trade policy for environmental goods: a reality check (ICTSD Issue Paper No. 7). Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.
- Khatun, F. (2012). Trade in environmental goods by least developed countries: issues for negotiations. South Asia Economic Journal, 13(2), 157-182.
- Kuriyama, C. (2012). A snapshot of current trade trends in potential environmental goods and services (APEC Policy Support Unit, Policy Brief No. 3).
- Liu, J., & Raven, H. P. (2010). China’s environmental challenges and implications for the world. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 40, 823-851.
- Morrison, M. W. (2018). China’s economic rise: history, trends, challenges and implications for the United States. Washington, DC; Congressional Research Service, Federal Publications.
- Mathur, S. K. (2011). Trade analysis of CSG sub-categories for regional groups and some selected member’s states of ESCAP in 2002–2008. Ovidus University Annals, Economic science series, X1(1), 1264-1279.
- Qian, Q. L. (2012). The environment quality and economics growth in China-a literature review and discussion (Master of Science Thesis, KTH industrial engineering and management). Stockholm, Sweden.
- Sun, P., & Heshmati, A. (2010). International trade and its effects on economic growth in China (IZA Discussion Paper No. 5151). Bonn Germany.
- UNESCAP (2011). Climate smart trade and investment in Asia and the Pacific: towards a triple-win outcome. United Nations Publication, New York.
- Valadez, V. G., & Hu, J. (2016). Relationship between the environment and economic Growth in China via exports: a perspective of ecological impact (2000-2014). Journal of Environmental Protection, 7, 1670-1692.
- Viljeon, W. (2012). Trade in environmental goods in Southern and Eastern Africa. Tralac, Trade Low Centre.
- Wang, S. (2015). The economic impact of China’s “New Normal” environmental policy. Erasmus University Rotterdam, MSc in Maritime Economics and Logistics.
- World Trade Organization (2014). Trade policy review of China.
- World Trade Statistical Review (2017). Trading patterns: global and regional perspective.
- Zhang, Z. X. (2011). Trade in environmental goods, with focus on climate- friendly goods and technologies (East- West Centre Working Papers, Economic Series No. 120).
-
The effect of trade liberalization on SMEs performance in Nigeria
Opeyemi Olagunju
,
Olujide Olakanmi ,
Uche Osakede
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(1).2023.36
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 21, 2023 Issue #1 pp. 425-437 Views: 751 Downloads: 317 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯSmall and medium enterprises (SMEs) are vital for achieving sustainable development. However, it remains unclear whether engagement in international trade-oriented policies improves SMEs operations, particularly in Africa, where concluded arrangements are made to partake in the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA). This study examined the role of trade liberalization on SMEs performance in Nigeria using the Central Bank of Nigeria’s statistical bulletin and the World Development Indicators from 1981 to 2019. The ARDL model showed that a 1% rise in trade openness improves SMEs performance by approximately 2% but only in the short run. For the control variables, a 1% increase in labor force participation reduced SMEs performance by about 6% in the short run and increased it by approximately 9% in the long run. The results also showed that a 1% rise in gross fixed capital formation in the short run reduced SMEs performance by approximately 5%. The results showed an inconclusive short-run effect of the exchange rate and taxes on SMEs performance. With a 1% increase in the exchange rate, SMEs performance improved by approximately 0.04% in the long run. Similarly, a 1% increase in taxes improves SMEs performance by approximately 2.90% in the long run. Findings suggest a positive effect of trade liberalization on SMEs performance and support the operation of AfCFTA in achieving sustainable development. Policy efforts should focus on productive investment strategies and using locally sourced inputs to raise the competitiveness of SMEs.
-
Applying the LASSO method to predict the impact of tariff reductions on customs revenues in Vietnam
The study assesses the impact of tariff reductions on fluctuations in customs revenues in Vietnam. The collection of research data was based on the official sources, namely the Government’s Web Portal and the World Bank’s website, and took place between 2002 and 2017. This paper uses the LASSO (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator) linear regression model to estimate and predict the relationship of data series, thereby drawing a regression equation to consider the impact of various factors on customs revenues. The results have proven that tariff reductions have no negative impact on customs revenues. When tariffs are reduced, import turnover increases, the level of compliance with tax laws by import-export enterprises increases, and smuggling and trade fraud decrease. Based on these conclusions, the paper proposes several policies aimed at ensuring future customs revenues in Vietnam. As follows from the findings provided below, in order to ensure customs revenues, the Vietnamese Government should introduce appropriate policies to improve the efficiency of customs management in Vietnam; envisage accurate planning and reasonable investment for the customs office in terms of facilities and human resources; establish reasonable non-tariff barriers to prevent fraud and abuse causing losses in customs revenues.
