Carbon tariffs on Chinese exports (毕业论文外文翻译英文版).doc

碳关税对中国出口是:减排、威胁、或闹剧摘要：(1)We estimate CO2 implicitly exported via commodities relative to a regions total emissions: We nd 15% for the industrialized, 12% for the developing region, and 24% for China.相对于一个地区CO2总排放量而言，我们估计CO2悄悄地通过大宗商品出口排放出来：我们发现15%是由工业化排放, 12%是由发展中地区排放, 24%是由中国为排放。(2) We analyze a Contraction and Convergence climate regime in a CGE model including international capital mobility and technology diffusion:我们在一个包括国际资本流动和技术扩散的CGE模型中，分析了一个收缩和收敛气候制度。When China does not participate in the regime and instead a carbon tariff is imposed on its exports, it will likely be worse off than when participating. This result does not hold for the developing region in general. Meanwhile, the effect on emissions appears small.当中国不参加这种气候制度,而是选择碳关税对其出口额施加影响时,它可能不如参与这种气候制度。一般来说，这个结果并不发展中地区。与此同时, 排放二氧化碳的影响会变小。1. Introduction 介绍A drastic reduction in global CO2 emissions critically depends on the inclusion of the developing and emerging economies,especially of China.全球二氧化碳排放量的大幅减少极度依赖于发展中国家和新兴经济体,尤其是中国。If China stays reluctant to join a binding post-Kyoto regime, Chinas emissions can possibly be reduced by imposing a carbon tariff, or carbon-content-based border measures, since the Chinese economy is carbonas well as export-intensive.如果中国说不愿意加入一个被绑定的后京都协定, 那么通过征收碳关税，中国的二氧化碳排放量可能降低,或者基于碳内容的边境措施,因为中国的经济是碳以及出口密集型的。This idea aims at the reduction or avoidance of carbon leakage, this means an increase in emissions abroad due to an emissions reduction at home.这个想法旨在减少或避免碳排放,这意味着在国外碳排放的增加是由于家庭减排。Such a carbon tariff could also be used as a threat in order to convince China to join a post-Kyoto climate regime.这样的一种碳关税也可以被用作说服中国加入后京都气候制度的威胁。Such policies have been controversially debated by politicians and economists, especially in the USA . However, Bhagwati and Mavroidis (2007) for example question the economic, juristic and political feasibility of carbon-content-based border tax adjustment (BTA)。尤其是在美国，这样的政策一直引起政客和经济学家的激烈辩论。然而,巴格瓦蒂和马弗鲁第斯，例如他们质疑基于碳内容的边境税调整的经济的、法律的和政治的可行性。Herein, the accordance with the WTO legislation is a critical aspect. And the economic effectiveness of such border measures is unclear. Shedding light on the economic effectiveness requires numerical assessment beyond a purely theoretical understanding.在此,依照世贸组织的立法是一个至关重要的方面。而且这样的边境措施带来的经济效益等尚不清楚。想要揭示这种经济效益所需要数值评估超出纯粹理论上的理解。It is therefore the main research task of our paper to assess how a carbon tariff on exports from China would affect welfare, GDP, the energy productivity, the terms of trade, the global carbon price and emissions or carbon leakage.因此,我们论文的主要的研究任务是评估中国出口所需缴纳的碳关税对福利、GDP、能源生产率、贸易条件、全球碳价格、碳排放或泄漏的影响。Herein, we compare the impacts on China with those on other developing countries. We apply an extended version of the computable general equilibrium (CGE) model DART.在此,我们比较那些对中国与其他发展中国家的影响。我们应用一种扩展版本的可计算一般均衡模型(CGE) DART（一种编程语言）。The model has a high sectoral resolution which captures the different carbon intensities across sectors that determine the rates of carbon-based tariffs.该模型具有较高的分辨率,它可以捕捉到跨部门的不同碳强度,因此这个模型可以确定碳关税的比例。The model also captures productivity spillovers associated with international trade and international investment beyond the pure trade effects represented in usual CGE models.该模型还可以捕捉与国际贸易和国际投资有关的的生产率外溢，这种外溢超出了在普通的CGE模型中表现出来的纯粹的贸易效应。In this way, the model captures trade externalities that can enhance the effectiveness of trade-related policy measures beyond direct trade effects.通过这种方式,该模型能捕捉贸易外部效应，这样可以提高贸易政策措施的有效性，超越直接的贸易效应。Therein, different futures are represented by a green scenario which isoptimistic regarding energy efciency improvements in contrast to a brown scenario which is more pessimistic.其中,不同的未来通过一个乐观的关于能源效率改进的“绿色”场景展现出来,这种“绿色”场景与一种“褐色”的更为悲观的场景形成对比。So far, several studies have estimated carbon emissions implicitly embodied in traded commodities for different countries and specically for China.到目前为止,几项研究已经估算出二氧化碳暗地的通过不同国家之间的商品贸易排放出来，特别是中国。Shui and Harriss (2006) estimate that US CO2 emissions would be 36% higher if the goods imported from China were produced in the USA, and that 714% of Chinas CO2 emissions can be attributed to exports to US consumers.Shui 和 Harriss估计, 如果美国从中国进口的货物是在本国生产，那么美国的二氧化碳排放量将会上升3 - 6%，中国所排放二氧化碳的7 - 14%的量可归因于供美国消费者消费的出口。Peters and Hertwich (2008) calculate carbon contents of trade based on the GTAP 6 data set for 2001. They nd net carbon imports for the Annex B region of 5.6% relative to total CO2 emissions produced in this region, and relative net carbon exports of 8.1% for the non-Annex B region.彼得斯（Peters）和赫特维琦（Hertwich）基于全球贸易分析项目6（GTAP6）的 2001年数据集计算出贸易的碳含量。他们发现相对于这个地区总二氧化碳排放而言，附录B区的净碳进口占5.6% ,相对的非附录B区的净碳出口占8.1%。In particular, according to their calculations Chinas net carbon exports amount to 17.8% of its total produced emissions, US net carbon imports amount to 7.3%, Japans to 15.3%, and Germanys to 15.7%. Switzerland (122.9%) and Latvia (60.7%) are the most intensive net carbon importers among Annex B countries, whereas Hong Kong (182.2%), the rest of the South African Customs Union (Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland) (176.4%) and Mozambique (172.4%) are the main net carbon importers among all countries. South Africa (38.2%) and the Russian Federation (21.6%) are the most intensive net carbon exporters among all countries.特别是,根据他们的计算，中国的净碳出口量占总生产排放的二氧化碳量的17.8%,美国的净碳进口量占二氧化碳排放总量的7.3%,日本为15.3%,和德国的15.7%。在所有的国家中，瑞士(122.9%)和拉脱维亚(60.7%)是在附件B的国家中的最密集的净碳进口国,而香港(182.2%)、其余的南部非洲关税同盟(莱索托Lesotho、纳米比亚Namibia、斯威士兰Swaziland) (176.4%)和莫桑比克Mozambique (172.4%)是主要的净碳进口商。在所有国家中，南非South Africa (38.2%)和俄罗斯联邦Russian Federation (21.6%)是最密集的净碳出口商。Pan et al. (2008) estimate Chinas emissions in 2006 on a consumption basis using data from InputOutput Tables of China in 2002 (NBS, 2006), the China Statistical Yearbook (various years), the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2006, 2007) and the World Resources Institute (WRI).Pan et al. (2008) 已消费为基础估计出2006年中国的碳排放量，这些数据来自于2002年中国投入产出表(国家统计局,2006)、中国统计年鉴(不同年份)、国际能源机构(IEA)和世界资源研究所(WRI)。They apply the Leontief inverse matrix and distinguish imported from domestically produced intermediate goods, which is often neglected in the literature. As a result, they nd emissions amounting to 3.8 Gt of CO2 rather than 5.5 Gt on the standard production basis. This implies that Chinas net carbon exports amount to 1.7 Gt in 2006.他们应用里昂惕夫逆转矩阵并且将国内生产的半成品和进口产品区分开来,这些往往会被文献忽视。因此,他们发现二氧化碳排放总计是3.8 Gt而不是在标准生产基础上计算出来的5.5 Gt。这意味着在2006年，中国的净碳出口总计为1.7 Gt。They conclude that Moreover, in the current institutional context, production methodologies encourage leakage through trade that may do more to displace than to reduce emissions. Both equity and efciency concern therefore suggest that emissions embodied in trade should receive special attention in the distribution of post-Kyoto abatement burdens. Accordingly, our CGE analysis captures supply and demand side carbon leakage between regions with and without climate policy.他们的结论是,“此外,在当前的机构环境因素 、生产方法中（我们）鼓励通过贸易排放（二氧化碳），这样可能带来比减少（碳）排放更多的（碳）转移。同时注重公平与效率，因此（我们）建议贸易中排放的碳 应该受到京都议定书中关于减排负担划分时的特别关注。”因此, 在有或者没有气候政策的区域之间，我们的可计算一般均衡（CGE）分析捕获了供应和需求方面的侧碳泄漏。In the CGE-model-based literature, Babiker and Rutherford(2005) and Bo hringer et al. (2010) nd that border tax adjustment (BTA) has a limited potential for reducing carbon leakage. Moreover, possible competitiveness disadvantages for rms within the European emissions trading scheme towards non-EU rms play a central role.在这篇以一般均衡模型为基础的文献中,Babiker、卢瑟福(2005)和Bo hringer et al. (2010) 发现,边境税调整(BTA)在减少碳泄漏方面的潜力是有限的。此外, 相对于非欧洲公司而言，在欧洲排放交易方案之内的公司的可能竞争力劣势发挥主要作用。Alexeeva-Talebi et al. (2008a) compare border tax adjustment based on imported quantities multiplied by domestic carbon intensity factors with an integrated emissions trading scheme based on imported emissions actually created during the production of imported commodities. They conclude that border tax adjustment protects domestic competitiveness more effectively, while an integrated emissions trading scheme achieves a greater reduction in emissions abroad. Alexeeva-Talebi et al. （2008a）将通过国内碳强度因素测算出来的基于进口量增加的边境税调整（BTA）和一种以实际上是在进口商品生产过程中产生的进口碳排放的集成碳排放交易方案进行比较。他们的结论是,边境税调整（BTA）可以更好的保护国内的竞争力,然而一个集成的碳排放交易方案可以达到更好的在国外减少排放的效果。(2008b) conclude from their simulations of the European emissions trading scheme that market-based policy measures such as the Clean Development Mechanism, allowing for flexibility in the location of emissions savings, can be effective substitutes for border tax adjustments in unilateral climate policy. Manders and Veenendaal (2008) nd that border tax measures under the European emissions trading scheme signicantly reduce carbon leakage.(2008 b)从他们对欧盟碳排放交易机制的模拟中得出，例如清洁发展机制等以市场为基础的政策措施, 这些措施允许灵活定位碳排放储蓄，可以成为在单方面的气候政策中有效替代边境税调整的代替品。Manders 和 Veenendaal(2008)发现, 在欧盟碳排放交易机制中边境税措施大大降低了碳泄漏。Furthermore, border tax measures appear benecial for the EU, while they may entail a welfare loss for the rest of the world. Herein, most of these studies use the GTAP 6 data for the base year 2001, while our study uses the GTAP 7 data for 2004. Moreover, we focus on China as a carbon as well as export-intensive economy, in comparison with the other developing countries.此外, 在他们对于世界上的其他国家可能遭受福利损失的同时，边境税措施呈现出利于欧盟的一面。在此,他们研究中的大部分利用以2001年为基准年的GTAP 6的数据,然而我们的研究使用的是以2004年为基准年的GTAP 7的数据。此外 ,相比其他发展中国家而言，我们将中国视为碳排放大国以及出口密集型国家。Finally, Lessmann et al. (2009) examine a numerical, intertemporal optimization framework with stable climate policy coalitions. They show that carbon-based import tariffs increase the emissions target of the coalition in a welfare improving way if the tariff rate is small relative to the Armington elasticity of imports.最后, Lessmann et al. (2009) 检查了一个数值的跨期的优化框架与稳定的气候政策联盟。他们表明, 在一条改善福利的道路上，以碳为基础的进口关税可以提高联盟的减排目标，如果关税税率低于阿明顿进口弹性。The rst contribution of our paper is to calculate and illustrate implicit carbon contents of commodities traded between (mainland) China, the industrialized countries and the developing countries using the GTAP 7 data for 2004 and distinguishing intermediate inputs by source country (Section 3). The second contribution is to examine the welfare and emissions effects of imposing a carbon tariff on exports from China and the other developing countries under a Contraction and Convergence climate regime with emissions trading (Section 4).我们论文的第一个贡献是计算和说明出在(大陆的)中国之间商品交易中的隐含碳含量的测定,工业化国家和发展中国家利用以2004年为基准年的GTAP 7的数据区分来源于原始资源国家的中间投入品的(第三部分)。第二个贡献是检查福利和对在进行收缩和收敛气候制度与碳排放交易制度之下的中国和其他发展中国家的出口商品征收关税的条件下的碳排放的影响。 (第四节)。Herein, we apply a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model that includes international capital mobility (foreign direct investment, FDI) and an innovative way of modeling international technology diffusion via capital mobility and trade, distinguishing vertical and horizontal spillovers. This feature appears important when analyzing trade policy in combination with climate policy, because trade and FDI may create emissions reductions via technology spillovers. Based on the results, the paper derives implications for post-Kyoto policies (Section 5). The paper starts with an overview of the underlying three-region model (Section 2).在此,我们应用一个可计算的一般均衡(CGE)模型,该模型包括国际资本流动(外国直接投资，FDI)和一种创新的通过资本流动和贸易创建国际技术扩散模型的方式，这种模型可以区分垂直和水平的溢出效应。在分析与气候政策结合的贸易政策时，这个功能似乎重要的。因为贸易和国外直接投资（FDI）可能通过技术溢出效应引起减排效果。基于这个研究结果,本文得出后京都政策(第五节)的影响。本文接下来概述了下面的三个区域模型(第二节)。2. The three-region model2。三个地区的模型The underlying DART model is a recursive dynamic multi-region, multi-sector CGE model of the world economy. The static part of the model is currently calibrated to the GTAP 7 database (Narayanan and Walmsley, 2008) that covers global production and trade data (including taxes and subsidies, governments and households, consumption and savings) for 113 countries and regions, 57 sectors (commodities) and ve production factors (skilled and unskilled labor, capital, land, natural resources) for the benchmark year 2004.下面的飞镖模型（DART model）是一个递归动态多地区、多部门参与的关于世界经济的可计算一般均衡模型（CGE）。这个模型的静态部分目前校准到GTAP 7数据库(纳拉亚南 Narayanan 和沃姆斯利Walmsley,2008) ,这个数据库以2004年基准年，涵盖了全球生产和贸易数据(包括税收和补贴,政府和家庭、消费和储蓄)，其中包括113个国家和地区,57部门(商品)和五个生产因素(技术和“非技术”的劳动、资本、土地、自然资源)。Carbon emissions are derived from the use of fossil fuels in production and for consumption in combination with the associated carbon intensity factors of coal, gas and oil. The model runs under GAMS MPSGE. For a detailed description see Klepper and Springer (2000), Springer (2002) and Klepper et al. (2003) and H ubler (2011). A mathematical description can be found in Appendix A.5.碳排放来自于在生产过程中的化石燃料的使用和有关的如煤炭、天然气、石油等碳含量高的物品的消费。模型在一般均衡分析的数学规划系统(MPSGE GAMS) 中运行。 详细描述见克莱伯Klepper 和施普林格Springer (2000),施普林格Springer (2002)和Klepper et al. (2003) 和H ubler (2011)。一个数学描述可以在本附录中找到。The GTAP data can be aggregated according to modelers needs. The version of the model scrutinized here distinguishes three regions: (mainland) China (CHI), industrialized region (IND) and developing region (DEV). The industrialized region encompasses the OECD countries plus Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan,Singapore and South Korea, since they are important sources of FDI into (mainland) China and potential sources of technology transfer into (mainland) China (compare Tseng and Zebregs, 2002; Whalley and Xin, 2006).GTAP的数据可以根据建模者的需求汇总。在这里详细检查模型的版本，并且将其区分三个区域:中国(大陆)中国(CHI)、工业化地区(IND)和发展中地区(DEV)。工业化地区包括经济合作与发展组织（OECD）的国家以及香港、澳门、台湾、新加坡和韩国,因为他们是中国引进国际直接接投资（FDI）的重要来源，而且是中国大陆引进技术的潜在来源。 ( 比较Tseng and Zebregs, 2002 和 Whalley and Xin, 2006)The model distinguishes the production factors labor, capital, land, and natural resources (fossil fuels). In order to analyze climate policies, CO2 emissions are linked to the use of fossil fuels in production and consumption. The current sectoral aggregation covers 30 sectors in each region.该模型区分生产因素劳动力、资本、土地和自然资源(化石燃料)。为了分析气候政策,将二氧化碳排放与化石燃料在生产和消费的使用相联系。当前聚集在每个地区的部门覆盖30个行业。Each commodity market is perfectly competitive. Product and factor prices are fully flexible. The model incorporates two types of agents for each region: producers (one producer per production sector and region) and consumers (one private and one public consumer per region). Producer behavior is derived from cost minimization for a given output. Consumers receive all income generated by providing primary factors to production processes.每个商品市场是完全竞争的。产品和生产要素的价格是完全灵活的。该模型结合了两种来自不同区域的代理:生产者(每生产部门和地区一个生产商)和消费者(每个地区一个私人的和一个公共的消费者)。生产者行为来源于给定产量条件下的成本最小化。消费者收到的所有收入来源于在生产过程提供个人要素。Consumers save a xed share of income and invest it into capital for production in each period. Herein, investments are produced like commodities by using production inputs. The disposable income (net of savings and taxes) is then used for utility maximization by purchasing and consuming commodities. The expenditure function is modeled as a CES (constant elasticity of substitution) composite, which combines an energy bundle with a non-energy bundle.消费者节省一个固定比例的收入将它作为资本投资于生产的各个阶段。在此，投资就像商品一样的被生产出来，通过使用生产投入。可支配收入(净储蓄和税收),通过购买和消费商品，从而达到效用最大化的状态。支出功能被作为CES (不变的替代弹性)复合建立函数模型,这结合了一个能量束与一个非能量束。Factor markets are perfectly competitive with full employment of all factors. Labor is a homogenous good, being mobile across industries within regions, but being internationally immobile.While in the basic version of the DART model capital is also internationally immobile, in this version capital is internationally mobile between the industrialized region and China. The bench-mark values of foreign capital located in China are taken from the China Statistical Yearbook (2006, 2007).要素市场是完全竞争与充分就业的因素。劳动是一个同质的商品，在区域之间的工业行业中移动，但是不能再国际间流动。而在基本版本的飞镖模型（DART model）中，资本在国际上也是不动。在这个版本中，资本在工业化地区和中国之间流动进行国际的流动。All regions are linked by bilateral trade flows, and all commodities except the investment good are traded among regions. Domestic and foreign commodities imported from different regions are imperfect (Armington) substitutes.所有地区都是联系在一起的双边贸易流, 除了投资商品之外的所有商品都是在地区之间进行交易。国内的和进口于不同地区的国外商品是不完美(阿明顿 Armington)替代品。The model is recursive-dynamic; it solves for a sequence of static one-period equilibria for future time periods. The major exogenous, regionally different driving factors of the model dynamics are population growth, total factor productivity growth,human capital growth and investment in capital. The model assumes constant, but regionally different growth rates of human capital (educational attainment) taken from Hall and Jones (1999). Population growth rates and labor participation rates are taken from the PHOENIX model (Hilderink, 2000). The resulting GDP growth paths are in line with recent projections by OECD(2008).该模型是递归动态的。主要的外因, 模型动力学中的不同的区域驱动因素是人口增长、全要素生产率增长,人力资本增长和投资资本。该模型假定是常数,但是在不同地区，不同的人类资本(受教育程度)增长率是从Hall和琼斯Jones (1999)。人口增长率和劳动力参与率取自菲尼克斯模型PHOENIX model (Hilderink, 2000)。由此产生的GDP增长路径符合最近经合组织(2008)的预测。Technological progress has an exogenous part in every region.It consists of improvements in total factor productivity and in energy-specic technological progress. In the latter case, a given output quantity can ceteris paribus be produced in a smaller volume of energy inputs. In (mainland) China, technological progress in a certain sector additionally increases in the import intensity of the related product, with the foreign capital intensity in this sector (horizontal linkage) and with forward and backward linkages (vertical linkage) across sectors within the production chain.在每一个地区，技术进步有一个外生部分。它包括提高全要素生产率和特定能源技术进步。在后一种情况下，在其他生产条件不变、资源投入量减少时，我们可以生产出相同的产量。在中国(大陆),某一特定部门的技术进步，伴随着在各部门生产链条内的该部门国外资本强度 (横向联动)和前后联系(垂直连锁)，可以额外提升相关产品的进口强度。Technological progress decreases the closer the Chinese technology level comes to the technology frontier given by the industrialized region. This results in a process of technological convergence.(For further details see Hu bler, 2011) This novel way of modeling international technology diffusion via FDI and trade appear