Skip to main content

Taxing the carbon footprint of world trade

With nations entering a new period of protectionist tariffs,  it is time to rethink the regulation of global trade.   Global trade is the driver of climate pollution and climate change.

Call for Carbon Charging:

In an article in Nature this month, three leading environmental experts have called for carbon charges rather than trade tariffs.

With President Trump imposing heavy tariffs on goods from China and the EU, and those countries following with retaliatory barriers, they fail to address the real problem of global trade.  That countries are simply exporting pollution and emissions through imports.

The authors point out that with all good intention of the Paris Climate Accord, it is unlikely that the target will be met of keeping warming below the critical 2 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels.  This would be so even if all countries were to meet their targets set out in their individual action plans.

Photo by Elle Dunn

Tackling carbon-intensive global trade

Only by tackling the drivers of global warming could it be possible to restrict global warming, and that means addressing the nature of global trade.

The Paris agreement has two main flaws.  First, the pledges are unbalanced.  Countries that do little will benefit from those that do more.  With a full blown trade war, it is increasingly unlikely that this situation could hold for long.  Secondly,  counties can simply export their pollution, buying carbon-intensive goods elsewhere, whilst boasting that they are 'meeting their emissions targets'.

Smart trade

The authors argue that now is the perfect time to redraft global trade, by bringing together the twin problems of trade and climate change.  To do this they argue for punitive carbon tariffs.  Instead of indiscriminate, protectionist barriers,  countries should impose a 'carbon charge' on imports.

This is not a new idea.  What is new, is the climate for action.  Last year, French President Macron called such charges 'indispensable'.   The US House of Representatives passed a Bill back in 2009, which did not receive approval from the Senate.

The authors argue that restricting trade in carbon-intensive goods by what they refer to as 'smart trade' is the only way to achieve climate targets.

 If you like this article, please help us by subscribing and getting the latest updates.


Subscribe to The Thin End


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well. No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing. The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party. That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team. Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't