IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diebps/82018.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do trade deals encourage environmental cooperation?

Author

Listed:
  • Morin, Jean-Frédéric
  • Chaudhuri, Vera
  • Gauquelin, Mathilde

Abstract

Trade agreements have mixed effects on the environment. On the one hand, trade generates additional pollution by raising production levels. Trade rules can also restrict the capacity of governments to adopt environmental regulations. On the other hand, trade agreements can favour the diffusion of green technologies, make production more efficient and foster environmental cooperation. Whether the overall effect is positive or negative partly depends on the content of the trade agreement itself. Recent studies have found that trade agreements with detailed environmental provisions, in contrast to agreements without such provisions, are associated with reduced levels of CO2 emission and suspended particulate matter (Baghdadi et al., 2013; Zhou, 2017). It remains unclear, however, which specific provisions have a positive environmental impact and how they are actually implemented. This briefing paper discusses how provisions on environmental cooperation in trade agreements can contribute to better environmental outcomes. It is frequently assumed that the more enforceable environmental commitments are, the more likely governments are to take action to protect the environment (Jinnah & Lindsay, 2016). This assumption leads several experts to argue in favour of strong sanction-based mechanisms of dispute settlement in order to ensure the implementation of trade agreements’ environmental provisions. Nevertheless, there is evidence to suggest that softer provisions can result in increased environmental cooperation, which can in turn favour domestic environmental protection (Yoo & Kim, 2016; Bastiaens & Postnikov, 2017). The European Union privileges this more cooperative approach in its trade agreements, and a recent European non-paper (2018) stresses that a sanction-based approach is a disincentive for ambitious environmental commitments and can result in a political backlash. To shed light on this debate, this paper examines the design and the implementation of cooperative environmental provisions of trade agreements. Our analysis is based on three main data sources. First, we make use of the TRade & ENvironment Dataset (TREND) which provides information on 285 types of environmental provisions included in 688 trade agreements signed since 1947 (Morin et al., 2018; see also www.TRENDanalytics.info for an online visualisation tool for the data). Second, we draw on official documents to better understand how these provisions are implemented domestically. Third, we fill the gaps using information provided by 12 interviewees who work for 7 different governments. This briefing paper is organised in four parts. We first provide an overview of some general trends in treaty design. In sections 2 to 4, we then take a closer look at selected types of provisions that prove particularly relevant due to their prevalence: (a) general commitments to cooperate on environmental issues; (b) clauses creating international environmental institutions; (c) provisions on technical and financial assistance from one party to another. We find that both the implementation of these provisions and their contribution to environmental protection vary depending on the degree of legal precision, the budgeting of financial resources and governments’ political commitment. Based on these findings, we suggest that trade negotiators should i) lay out precise clauses with specific targets and clear time frames, (ii) specify in the trade agreement where the funding for cooperation activities will be sourced and (iii) create forums where civil society actors can engage in a dialogue with policy-makers on the implementation of trade agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Morin, Jean-Frédéric & Chaudhuri, Vera & Gauquelin, Mathilde, 2018. "Do trade deals encourage environmental cooperation?," Briefing Papers 8/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:82018
    DOI: 10.23661/bp8.2018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/199820/1/die-bp-2018-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.23661/bp8.2018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baghdadi, Leila & Martinez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Zitouna, Habib, 2013. "Are RTA agreements with environmental provisions reducing emissions?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 378-390.
    2. Li Zhou & Xi Tian & Zhengyi Zhou, 2017. "The effects of environmental provisions in RTAs on PM2.5 air pollution," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(27), pages 2630-2641, June.
    3. Sikina Jinnah & Abby Lindsay, 2016. "Diffusion Through Issue Linkage: Environmental Norms in US Trade Agreements," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(3), pages 41-61, August.
    4. Jean-Frédéric Morin & Andreas Dür & Lisa Lechner, 2018. "Mapping the Trade and Environment Nexus: Insights from a New Data Set," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 18(1), pages 122-139, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zakaria Sorgho & Joe Tharakan, 2022. "Do PTAs with Environmental Provisions Reduce GHG Emissions? Distinguishing the Role of Climate-Related Provisions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 709-732, November.
    2. Brandi, Clara & Schwab, Jakob & Berger, Axel & Morin, Jean-Frédéric, 2020. "Do environmental provisions in trade agreements make exports from developing countries greener?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    3. Sorgho, Zakaria & Tharakan, Joe, 2022. "Do PTAs with environmental provisions reduce GHG emissions? Distinguishing the effectiveness of climate-related provisions," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2022012, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Zakaria Sorgho & Tharakan Joe, 2020. "Do PTAs with environmental provisions reduce emissions? Assessing the effectiveness of climate-related provisions?," Working Papers hal-03004353, HAL.
    5. William Bekoe & Talatu Jalloh, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Implications of Free Trade on Environmental Quality: Empirical Evidence from Africa," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 19-36, January.
    6. Basak Bayramoglu & Estelle Gozlan & Clément Nedoncelle & Thibaut Tarabbia, 2023. "Trade Agreements and Sustainable Fisheries [Accords commerciaux et pêche durable]," Working Papers hal-04101044, HAL.
    7. Haas, Levi & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus R., 2019. "International Trade: Smarten up to talk the talk," MPRA Paper 99096, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    9. Christopher M. Dent, 2021. "Trade, Climate and Energy: A New Study on Climate Action through Free Trade Agreements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-30, July.
    10. Mehran Idris Khan & Qianxun Xu, 2021. "An Assessment of Environmental Policy Implications under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: A Perspective of Environmental Laws and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Elisabeth Christen & Klaus S. Friesenbichler & Alexander Hudetz & Claudia Kettner-Marx & Ina Meyer & Franz Sinabell, 2021. "Außenhandel und nachhaltige Entwicklung in Österreich. Befunde auf der Grundlage von vorliegenden Quellen," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 69290.
    12. Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Walid Oueslati, 2018. "Do deep and comprehensive regional trade agreements help in reducing air pollution?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 743-777, December.
    13. Noémie Laurens & Jean-Frédéric Morin, 2019. "Negotiating environmental protection in trade agreements: A regime shift or a tactical linkage?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 533-556, December.
    14. Clara Brandi & Dominique Blümer & Jean-Frédéric Morin, 2019. "When Do International Treaties Matter for Domestic EnvironmentalLegislation?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(4), pages 14-44, November.
    15. Derek Kellenberg & Arik Levinson, 2019. "Misreporting trade: Tariff evasion, corruption, and auditing standards," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 106-129, February.
    16. Roy, Jayjit, 2017. "On the environmental consequences of intra-industry trade," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 50-67.
    17. 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.
    18. Xiaofei Liu & Zhenbo Wang & Xuegang Cui, 2021. "Scenario Simulation of the Impact of China’s Free-Trade Zone Construction on Regional Sustainable Development: A Case Study of the Pearl River Delta Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Oueslati, Walid, 2016. "Are deep and comprehensive regional trade agreements helping to reduce air pollution?," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 292, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    20. Yanyun Li & Faqin Lin, 2022. "Beyond tariff evasion: bypass effect of FTAs to circumvent technical barriers," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(4), pages 1085-1105, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Handel und Investitionen; Umwelt; Ökosysteme und Ressourcen;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:diebps:82018. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.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.