Quantifying regional carbon inequality and policy implications under the “Belt and Road” Initiative
-
摘要:在全球贸易背景下量化分析“一带一路”区域的碳不平等，厘清“一带一路”区域隐含碳排放和经济收益不均衡分配的内在机制，是践行绿色“一带一路”倡议的科学前提及基础．本研究基于全球贸易分析项目（GTAP）数据库，构建环境拓展的多区域投入产出（MRIO）模型，涵盖102个“一带一路”沿线国家和地区，且依沿线区位合并为9大研究区域，核算生产和消费视角下“一带一路”区域碳排放、增加值，追溯隐含碳排放、增加值在研究区域间的空间转移格局，通过构建双边贸易中碳不平等指标及全球贸易网络中碳不平等综合指标，全面地量化分析了“一带一路”区域的碳不平等现象．研究表明： 1）2014年“一带一路”区域生产和消费视角下的碳排放分别占全球碳排放总量（25966.23 Mt）的65.29%和60.54%；“一带一路”区域生产和消费视角下的增加值分别占全球增加值总额（669714.27亿美元）的40.87%和40.10%．2）在全球贸易中，“一带一路”区域承担来自非“一带一路”区域的净碳排放转移（即“一带一路”区域向非“一带一路”区域净出口隐含碳排放量）1234.25 Mt，同时从非“一带一路”区域获得了5154.83亿美元净经济收益；其中，“一带一路”中东区域作为“一带一路”区域中唯一的隐含碳排放净进口区域，向“一带一路”区域净转移碳排放152.18 Mt，同时在全球贸易中获得了2801.36亿美元净经济收益；中国是最大的隐含碳排放净出口区域，承担来自全球的净碳排放转移达到903.98 Mt，其中31.30%来自“一带一路”区域的净碳排放转移，同时在全球贸易中承担了349.12亿美元净经济损失．3）在“一带一路”区域内，中国和“一带一路”中东区域之间的碳不平等指标最大，为1.75，表明中国在双边贸易碳不平等中处于不利地位，这主要是由中国重工业、建筑业部门与“一带一路”中东区域贸易中存在严重的隐含碳排放和增加值错配导致；“一带一路”中东区域在全球贸易网络中碳不平等综合指标为2.53，表现为主要受益者，这主要是由于该区域农业、建筑业和服务业均为隐含碳排放净进口部门，而重工业部门获得了大量的净经济收益．整体来看，“一带一路”区域在全球贸易碳不平等中普遍处于不利地位，中国、“一带一路”南亚区域和“一带一路”欧洲区域在全球贸易网络中碳不平等综合指标分别为−2.60、−2.16、−2.22，是全球贸易碳不平等的主要受害者．本研究结果可为在全球贸易下践行绿色“一带一路”倡议，实现“一带一路”区域碳治理与经济协调发展提供科学依据和政策启示．Abstract:In the context of global trade, quantitative analysis of carbon inequality in the “Belt and Road” region, and clarification of internal mechanism of uneven distribution of embodied carbon emissions and economic benefits in the “Belt and Road” region lay the scientific foundation for implementation of green “Belt and Road” Initiative．Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) database was used to build an environmentally extended multi-regional input-output (MRIO) model．This MRIO model covers a total of 102 countries and regions in the “Belt and Road” region, divided into 9 areas according to location．Carbon emissions were calculated from the perspective of production and consumption, traces spatial transfer patterns of embodied carbon emissions and added value．Index of carbon inequality in bilateral trade and comprehensive index of carbon inequality in the global trade network were built, to comprehensively quantify and analyze the phenomenon of carbon inequality．In 2014, carbon emissions from production and consumption in the “Belt and Road” region accounted for 65.29% and 60.54% of total global carbon emissions (25966.23 Mt), respectively．Value added from production and consumption in the region accounted for 40.87% and 40.10% of total global value added (66971.427 billion US dollars), respectively．In Global trade, the “Belt and Road” region bore 1234.25 Mt of net carbon emission transfer from non “Belt and Road” region, and obtained 515.483 billion US dollars of net economic benefits from non the “Belt and Road” region．“Belt and Road” Middle East region, was found to be the only net importer of embodied carbon emissions: a transfer of 152.18 Mt of carbon emissions to “Belt and Road” region, and a net economic benefits of 280.136 billion US dollars in Global trade．China was the largest net exporter of embodied carbon emissions, bearing 903.98 Mt of net carbon emissions, 31.30% was from the “Belt and Road” region．China bore a net economic loss of 34.912 billion US dollars in Global trade．Carbon inequality index between China and “Belt and Road” Middle East region was the largest, reaching 1.75．China was in a disadvantaged position for carbon inequality in bilateral trade, mainly due to serious mismatch of embodied carbon emissions and value added in the bilateral trade between heavy industry, construction sector and “Belt and Road” Middle East region. Comprehensive index of carbon inequality in the global trade network of “Belt and Road” Middle East region was 2.53．Agriculture, construction, and service industries in the region were net importers of embodied carbon emissions, while the heavy industry sector obtained a large amount of net economic benefits．“Belt and Road” region was generally at a disadvantage in the global trade carbon inequality．Comprehensive indexes of carbon inequality in global trade network of China, “Belt and Road” South Asia region and “Belt and Road” Europe region were −2.60, −2.16 and −2.22 respectively, being victims of carbon inequality in global trade．This work provides the scientific basis for implementation of green “Belt and Road” Initiative under Global trade and realization of coordinated development of the “Belt and Road” regional carbon governance and economy．
-
表 1本研究模型中的区域分类及涵盖范围
区域 包含的国家和地区 中国 中国大陆 “一带一路”东北亚 韩国、蒙古、俄罗斯 “一带一路”东南亚 文莱、柬埔寨、印度尼西亚、老挝、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡、泰国、越南、东南亚其他地区 “一带一路”南亚 孟加拉国、印度、尼泊尔、巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡、南亚其他地区 “一带一路”欧洲 奥地利、保加利亚、克罗地亚、塞浦路斯、捷克、爱沙尼亚、希腊、匈牙利、意大利、拉脱维亚、立陶宛、卢森堡、马耳他、波兰、葡萄牙、罗马尼亚、斯洛伐克、斯洛文尼亚、阿尔巴尼亚、白俄罗斯、乌克兰、东欧其他地区 “一带一路”中亚 哈萨克斯坦、吉尔吉斯斯坦、塔吉克斯坦、原苏联其他地区 “一带一路”中东 亚美尼亚、阿塞拜疆、格鲁吉亚、巴林、伊朗、科威特、阿曼、卡塔尔、沙特阿拉伯、土耳其、阿拉伯联合酋长国、西亚其他地区、埃及、摩洛哥、突尼斯、北非其他地区 “一带一路”非洲（除北非） 贝宁、布基纳法索、喀麦隆、科特迪瓦、加纳、几内亚、尼日利亚、塞内加尔、多哥、西非其他地区、中非、中南非地区、埃塞俄比亚、肯尼亚、马达加斯加、莫桑比克、卢旺达、坦桑尼亚、乌干达、赞比亚、津巴布韦、东非其他地区、博茨瓦纳、纳米比亚、南非 “一带一路”其他 新西兰、阿根廷、玻利维亚、智利、厄瓜多尔、秘鲁、乌拉圭、委内瑞拉、哥斯达黎加、尼加拉瓜、巴拿马、萨尔瓦多、多米尼加、牙买加、特立尼达和多巴哥 非“一带一路” 澳大利亚、大洋洲其他地区、中国香港、日本、中国台湾、东亚其他地区、加拿大、美国、墨西哥、北美其他地区、巴西、哥伦比亚、巴拉圭、南美其他地区、危地马拉、洪都拉斯、中美洲其他地区、波多黎各、加勒比海地区、比利时、丹麦、芬兰、法国、德国、爱尔兰、荷兰、西班牙、瑞典、英国、瑞士、挪威、欧洲自由贸易联盟其他成员国、欧洲其他地区、以色列、约旦、马拉维、毛里求斯、南非海关联盟其他成员国、世界其他地区 
下载:
导出CSV
-
[1] 任琳,孙振民. “一带一路”倡议与全球经济治理[J]. 党政研究,2019(3):74doi:10.3969/j.issn.1008-9187.2019.03.009 [2] 王广谦. “一带一路”助推全球经济增长[J]. 中国金融,2019(8):17 [3] DUNLAP R E, BRULLE R J. Climate change and society: sociological perspectives[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015 [4] THUILLER W. Climate change and the ecologist[J]. Nature,2007,448(7153):550doi:10.1038/448550a [5] 魏璐瑶,陆玉麒. “一带一路”背景下全球气候变化的响应机制研究[J]. 生态经济,2019,35(12):153 [6] 周波涛,徐影,韩振宇,等. “一带一路”区域未来气候变化预估[J]. 大气科学学报,2020,43(1):255doi:10.13878/j.cnki.dqkxxb.20191125009 [7] FENG K S,DAVIS S J,SUN L X,et al. Outsourcing CO2within China[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,2013,110(28):11654doi:10.1073/pnas.1219918110 [8] ZHANG N,LIU Z,ZHENG X M,et al. Carbon footprint of China’s Belt and Road[J]. Science,2017,357(6356):1107doi:10.1126/science.aao6621 [9] LONG R Y,LI J Q,CHEN H,et al. Embodied carbon dioxide flow in international trade:a comparative analysis based on China and Japan[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2018,209:371 [10] XIONG Y J,WU S M. Real economic benefits and environmental costs accounting of China-US trade[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2021,279:111390doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111390 [11] SUN C W,CHEN L Y,ZHANG F. Exploring the trading embodied CO2effect and low-carbon globalization from the international division perspective[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2020,83:106414doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106414 [12] YU Y,FENG K S,HUBACEK K. China’s unequal ecological exchange[J]. Ecological Indicators,2014,47:156doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.01.044 [13] PRELL C,FENG K S. The evolution of global trade and impacts on countries’ carbon trade imbalances[J]. Social Networks,2016,46:87doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2016.03.001 [14] PRELL C,SUN L X. Unequal carbon exchanges:understanding pollution embodied in global trade[J]. Environmental Sociology,2015,1(4):256doi:10.1080/23251042.2015.1114208 [15] 孟凡鑫,苏美蓉,胡元超,等. 中国及“一带一路”沿线典型国家贸易隐含碳转移研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境,2019,29(4):18 [16] FANG K,WANG S Q,HE J J,et al. Mapping the environmental footprints of nations partnering the Belt and Road Initiative[J]. Resources,Conservation and Recycling,2021,164:105068doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105068 [17] 李清如. 中日对“一带一路”沿线国家贸易隐含碳的测算及影响因素分析[J]. 现代日本经济,2017,36(4):69 [18] HAN M Y,LAO J M,YAO Q H,et al. Carbon inequality and economic development across the Belt and Road regions[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2020,262:110250doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110250 [19] WANG X,YANG J X,ZHOU Q,et al. Mapping the exchange between embodied economic benefits and CO2emissions among Belt and Road Initiative countries[J]. Applied Energy,2022,307:118206doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.118206 [20] ZHANG W,LIU Y,FENG K S,et al. Revealing environmental inequality hidden in China’s inter-regional trade[J]. Environmental Science & Technology,2018,52(13):7171 [21] WEI W D,HAO S J,YAO M T,et al. Unbalanced economic benefits and the electricity-related carbon emissions embodied in China’s interprovincial trade[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2020,263:110390doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110390 [22] XIONG Y L,ZHANG Q Z,TIAN X,et al. Environmental inequity hidden in skewed water pollutant - value flows via interregional trade in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2021,290:125698doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125698 [23] WANG Y H,XIONG S Q,MA X M. Carbon inequality in global trade:evidence from the mismatch between embodied carbon emissions and value added[J]. Ecological Economics,2022,195:107398doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107398 [24] 孟凡鑫, 孙华平, 孟小燕. 绿色“一带一路”[M]. 上海: 上海科学技术文献出版社, 2021 [25] WANG P P,LI Y P,HUANG G H,et al. A multi-scenario factorial analysis and multi-regional input-output model for analyzing CO2emission reduction path in Jing-Jin-Ji region[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2021,300:126782doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126782 [26] SUN C Z,YAN X D. Measurement and transfer analysis of grey water footprint of Chinese provinces and industries based on a multi-regional input-output model[J]. Progress in Geography,2020,39(2):02000207 [27] 孟凡鑫,夏昕鸣,胡元超,等. 中国与“一带一路”沿线典型国家贸易虚拟水分析[J]. 中国工程科学,2019,21(4):92 [28] ZHENG H M,LI A M,MENG F X,et al. Ecological network analysis of carbon emissions from four Chinese metropoles in multiscale economies[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2021,279:123226doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123226 [29] DU M X,LIU Q Y,MACDONALD G K,et al. Examining the sensitivity of global CO2emissions to trade restrictions over multiple years[J]. Environmental Science & Technology Letters,2022,9(4):293 [30] MANGıR N,ŞAHIN Ü A. An environmentally extended global multi-regional input-output analysis of consumption-based and embodied import-based carbon emissions of Turkey[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International,2022,29(36):54813doi:10.1007/s11356-022-19290-z -
下载:
点击查看大图
图(2)/
表(1)
计量
- 文章访问数:167
- HTML全文浏览量:36
- PDF下载量:43
- 被引次数:0
