文章 Articles

Is the west to blame for China’s emissions?

China’s exports to the west accounted for almost a quarter of the country’s total CO2 emissions in 2004. Rich countries must help the developing world make the switch to a low-carbon economy, write Wang Tao & Jim Watson.

Article image

China is now believed to be the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas, overtaking the United States to take the number one spot. This has led to renewed calls for China to act in reducing the environmental impacts of its phenomenal growth. These calls have been resisted, inside and outside China, on the grounds that industrialised countries are responsible for the majority of emissions to date. Moreover, it has been argued that the steep rise in China’s carbon emissions has been fuelled by exports of cheap goods from its factories to western consumers.

China is rapidly becoming the world’s manufacturing hub. The country is now exporting an increasingly large quantity of labour and energy-intensive goods to developed countries. A high-profile example is the arrival of the world's largest cargo ship – the Emma Maersk – in the UK just before Christmas 2006. It was carrying more than 45,000 tonnes of Christmas goods from Chinese factories for sale to consumers in the European Union.

Trade surplus

China’s trade surplus with the rest of the world has accelerated sharply since its accession to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2001. In 2004, China's exports contributed 34% to the total GDP, and generated a surplus of some US$32 billion. By 2006, China’s trade surplus had reached US$177 billion, and many predict that the figure for 2007 will be at least US$200 billion. The WTO estimated in 2005 that China's exports could overtake the US and Germany by 2010. Only two years later, China has already surpassed Germany as the world’s largest exporter.

The rise of China as a global trading power has led to tensions in the EU and the US over competitiveness and safety issues. Trade conflicts with the US have been a regular occurrence for many years – and have often arisen alongside wider political tensions. In recent times, issues of food safety and steel subsidies have attracted particular attention. Meanwhile, retailers in the EU have had to recall a series of Chinese-made toys amid safety concerns. In addition, the European Commission has recently extended anti-dumping duties on energy saving light-bulbs from China for a further year due to lobbying from German lighting companies. This seems counter-productive given moves within the EU to phase out incandescent lighting and encourage consumers to make the switch to more expensive compact fluorescents.

While the large trade surplus is a major driver of economic growth in China, it has its downsides. According to a recent speech by Bo Xilai, China’s then minister for commerce, 58% of China's exports are from multinational ventures in China. This led some to argue that the Chinese economy is failing to capture enough of the economic wealth generated by such ventures, since much of it is retained by parent companies abroad. Of concern also is the polluting, energy-intensive nature of products such as rolled steel, which are being increasingly manufactured for export as well as domestic markets. While their overall share of exports has been small to date, rapid growth is contributing to China’s local, regional and global environmental impacts. The Chinese government cut the export rebate three times in 2007 alone on these energy intensive goods, and imposed a 10% export tariff on some. However, their efforts have so far been ineffective due to strong international demand.

Exporting emissions

Despite some discussion of the implications of China’s trade surplus on its emissions, there has been little work to quantify this. In a recent Tyndall Centre briefing note [pdf], we set out an initial assessment of the emissions from goods and services that China exports. Our analysis concludes that in 2004 – the most recent year for which comprehensive data is available – net exports accounted for 23% of China’s total CO2 emissions. This is due to both China’s large trade surplus and the relatively high carbon intensity of the Chinese economy. It is a figure comparable to Japan's total CO2 emissions, and more than double the UK's emissions in the same year (see figure 1). The equivalent emissions figures for 2005 and 2006 could be larger, since China’s trade surplus has grown.

Carbon dioxide emissions in 2004

Figure 1: CO2 emissions from China’s net exports in 2004 in comparison to other countries’ total emissions

A number of other studies have been conducted, some of which reach similar conclusions. A report in 2005 by Bin Shui, of the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research, indicated that 7% to 14% of China's CO2 emissions in the period from 1997 to 2003 were due to exports to the US alone. Jiang Kejun of the Energy Research Institute, which is based in the Chinese government’s National Development and Reform Commission, suggests exports account for around 20% of China’s total national energy consumption.

These results are inevitably subject to uncertainties and simplifications, not least because of a lack of data on the carbon intensity of different exported products. However, the implications are clear. The extent of “exported carbon” from China should lead to a re-think by government negotiators working towards a new climate-change agreement beyond 2012.

International footprints

The nation state may be at the heart of most international negotiations and treaties, but global trade means a country’s carbon footprint is international. Should countries only remain concerned with emissions in their borders? Or should they also assume responsibility for pollution from the production of goods and services they consume? The scale of emissions due to exports from countries such as China, not to mention the emissions caused by international air and marine freighting of goods, provide strong arguments for the latter approach.

This analysis also strengthens the case for early action by the developed world in two respects. Firstly, it provides evidence to the international negotiations around climate change that not only are industrialised countries historically responsible for the majority of carbon emissions to date, but industrialised countries may also have significant responsibility for driving the rapid growth in emissions from industrialising countries such as China. Secondly, it supports the expansion of efforts to help developing countries reduce the carbon emissions from economic growth through technical assistance and finance, helping developing countries to transition to a low-carbon economy before too much investment is locked in a carbon-intensive economic model.

 

Tao Wang and Jim Watson, Sussex Energy Group, University of Sussex and Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, UK

Homepage photo by Ian Koh

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

停止买中国货

中国的排放问题完全是西方国家的错误因为是西方国家一直在坚持从中国购买产品,西方国家必须停止并最终终止这个可怕的尝试,它们必须马上停止从中国购买产品以使得中国能回到对环境尽责的状态。

Stop Buying Chinese

Since it is totally the west's fault for emission in China because the west keep on buying from China, the west must cease and desist this horrible practice. The west must stop buying from China right now so that China can return to its environmental conscientious state.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

碳排放的计算

很有意思的观点。我对碳贸易所知不多,不过现在看来,碳排放的计算方式,不能局限于以地域做划分来计算。除了产生碳排放的商品出产地,我们还必须考虑到这种商品的消费地,商品所产生利润的分配形式等。如何合理的计算碳排放,是一个难题。
顺带说一下楼下的评论,我不得不说这代表了发达国家的一种呼声,这种呼声就像中国清朝所采取的“闭关锁国”政策一样,惧怕外国的影响,而放弃交流沟通的机会。我想,发达国家可以采取了这种方式来“减少碳排放”,中国才成为最终的收益者。

the calculation method of carbon emission

a very interesting opinion.I don't know much about carbon trade,but thinking about it now,the way to calculate carbon emission shouldn't be confined by regional difference.Apart from the country of origin of commodities which will generate carbon emission,we must also take into consideration the consumption area of commodities and the distribution mode of profit.How to calculate the carbon emission reasonably is a very tricky question.
Re:comment 1,I think you voice the opinion of the developed countries.Just like the policy of "closed custom,locked country"in Qing dynasty,this opinion symbolizes the way of being afraid of the outside influence and giving up the communication opportunity.Developed countries could reduce emission in this way if they want, and then I think its China which would become the final beneficiary?

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

付责任

中国粗放式发展政策的制定是在1992年邓小平南巡广东的时候,他告诉人们中国需要开放,去追求更高的经济增长,发展生产力,实现共同富裕的目标。在1992年世界各国就已经认识到在工业化国家中出现的因为环境问题给经济增长和发展所带来的消极影响。科技进步已经得到应用并且仍在被继续研发去抵御这些消极的影响。例如,中国本来可以选择了一条类似于“绿色发展”或“可持续发展”的破坏性较小的发展道路,但是这些道路都被大大的忽视了。在1994年我就曾与广东一个比较大的城市的市长探讨过这些议题,他说中国首先需要发展,只有当中国发展起来后它才可能去担心纠正环境破坏的错误,中国选择这种发展模式来自于国内,中国不得不忍受发展的各种决定并且中国领导人还要为出现相反的结果而付责任。
W. Parham [email protected]

Taking responsibility

The stage was set for China’s unbridled development when Deng Xiaoping visited Guangdong in 1992 telling the people that China needed to open up, to pursue broad economic growth, to develop productive forces, and to achieve the goal of common affluence. In 1992 the world already had recognized the negative environmental effects that such economic growth and development had generated in industrialized countries. Technologies were already in use and more were being developed to offset these negative effects. China could have chosen a less destructive pathway like “green development” or “sustainable development”, for example, but these paths were largely ignored.

I discussed these issues in 1994 with the Mayor of one of Guangdong’s larger cities. He said that first China needed to develop and only then could it worry about correcting environmental damage. China’s choice of development style came from within. China has to live with its development decisions and the responsibility for the adverse consequences must be borne by China’s leaders.

W. Parham
[email protected]

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

付责任 -> 负责任

纠正一个错别字。 刚刚听说今年高考错一个字要扣一分。

A spelling mistake "负责任", not "付责任"

There is a spelling mistake in the article. It is said that student will lose one point if there is one spelling point in the national university entrance examination.