碳边境调节措施与替代政策研究
|
摘要
人们对气候变化、碳排放这一全球公共产品市场失灵问题的关注,导引出了旨在减排的一种全新的对外贸易政策措施一一碳边境调节措施。本文从经由对外贸易形成转移温室气体排放的现实出发,对碳边境调节措施的作用机理、发展趋势、经济影响及其替代政策进行全面而系统的研究。
文章的研究思路是：基于减排的贸易政策研究文献以及基础理论的综述,从碳边境调节措施的实施背景、最新进展和各方政策反应的现实出发、对碳边境调节措施的作用机理、在WTO体系下的合法性及其局部均衡效应进行系统阐述,进而对碳边境调节措施的经济效应与贸易影响、实施方案及替代政策的选择等进行深入分析,并针对中国实际提出相关政策建议。文章认为,由于一些国家曲解WTO规则和贸易措施决策机制,碳使GATT一般例外条款被滥用,致使碳边境调节措施违背WTO旨在运用该条款协调贸易与环境发展矛盾的初衷。本文通过分析碳边境调节措施在GATT/WTO框架下的违法性和不可操作性,指出其“以环境保护之名,行贸易保护之实”的本质。在此基础上,文章对与旨在减少转移排放的贸易政策相近的国内政策和国际规则的政策效果进行比较研究,指出了碳边境调节措施是各国利益平衡机制下的贸易保护政策选择的结果。本文试图寻找有效减少碳排放、避免贸易保护主义发生的碳边境调节措施的替代方案,即基于多中心理论建立多中心碳排放交易市场,可以将当今世界各国已经建立起来的分散的碳交易市场以多中心的方式联合起来,来减少温室气体因各碳交易市场的价格差异而出现的转移排放。文章指出为了防止转移排放的发生,应采用碳排放密度控制法,它可以在没有设定排放量最高限额的情形下,促使企业主动寻找低碳环保的生产方法和绿色能源。从国内政策层面,本文指出,要完善现有仅对企业实行的碳排放配额分配方案一一纳入居民家庭的有偿碳排放配额分配法。
本文的主要创新之处：(1)从经济学作用机理、WTO规则的适用性,以及具体实施细节等多个角度,综合论述碳边境调节措施的合法性和可行性,并基于欧盟对航空业实行的碳边境调节的最新进展,进一步论证碳边境调节措施实施的可能性、根源、渗透性及其深远的经济影响；(2)基于多中心理论探讨解决碳排放问题的有效方案途径,从全球公共产品的视角,提出应通过建立一种国际间竞争与合作关系并存的协调机制,来解决全球减少碳排放以应对气候变化的市场失灵问题,进而提出了替代碳边境调节措施的单位产出碳密集度法；(3)基于碳排放交易体系与碳税政策效果的分析,提出建立有效碳排放交易体系的具体做法,即纳入居民家庭的有偿碳排放配额分配法。(4)运用层次分析模型,对碳边境调节措施的3种实施方案进行比较分析,得出结论：碳边境调节措施仅对其他国家的碳减排具有威慑作用,没有直接促进其他国家减排的作用效果,还极有可能演变成新型的贸易壁垒、形成贸易保护,阻碍世界的自由贸易。本文还运用层次分析模型对碳边境调节措施及其3种替代政策：差异化多中心碳排放交易体系、单位产出碳排放密度标准和纳入居民家庭的碳排放交易体系4种碳减排方案,从普及性、公正性、可行性、减排效果和经济效率5个评价指标进行综合比较,排列出国际碳减排的优先方案次序,并选择出国际碳减排的最优方案。
People concerns about the problem of climate change and the problem of global common goods market failure, which lead to a trade policy of greenhouse gas emission reduction-carbon border adjustment. Base on the fact that the transfer of greenhouse gas emission is through two ways:trade and foreign direct investment. Therefore, this thesis researches on the foreign trade policies to reduce the transfer emission, which are carbon border adjustment measures and the choice of their alternative policies. This dissertation makes a comprehensive and systematic study on the mechanism. The trends and the economic impact of carbon border adjustment and its alternative policies.
The research idea of this thesis starts with the foreign trade policies of reducing the transfer emission, and researches on carbon border adjustment measures'implement background as well as policy responses from different parties. The thesis analyses Carbon border adjustment's unlawfulness and Partial equilibrium effects in the system of WTO, then makes analysis of cases on the latest development of this measures, which is the practice of EU aircraft industry's carbon emission border adjustment. The thesis believes that the measures which some countries have been taking of carbon border adjustment have abused of GATT's escape clauses and violated WTO's original intention, which aims to minimize the contradiction between development of trade and environment. By analyzing the illegality and impossibility of carbon border adjustment in the environment of WTO and GATT, the thesis points that the adjustment is implementing trade protection in the name of environment protection. Thesis compares the political effects of carbon border adjustment and the domestic policies and international regulations similar to the external trade policies reducing transfer emission. Then it draws the conclusion that the practice of carbon border the result of trade protection policies'options under the balance mechanism of each country's interests. This thesis attempts to find the alternative projects and balance point of controlling carbon emission effectively and avoiding trade protectionism. It proposes that in the situation of transfer emission, the developed economies may adopt the carbon emission density control method, which is the second best option to reduce carbon emission. And the developing economies can use the Nobel laureate in economics, Elinor Ostrom's poly-centric theory to establish a polycentric carbon emission trading market in the resident households. On the world level, it is workable to unite the dispersed carbon trading markets which the various countries have established to reduce the greenhouse gases' transfer emission.
This thesis analyzes that the basic reasons of the developed economies'abusing of carbon border adjustment measures are the carbon emission responsibility's unreasonable allocation, the ecological orientation of trade policy decision-making mechanism, the trade regulations'improper use in domestic law. The thesis summarizes China's foreign trade and domestic policy adjustments and the results for achieving the low-carbon economy goals It proposes the reasonable countermeasure for China to deal with the developed economies' transfer emission, and to reduce carbon emission effectively from the angles of international organizations, domestic policies and foreign trade policies and measures.
The main innovation of this thesis:(1) from the perspective of the economics mechanism of action, the applicability of WTO rules to analyze the legitimacy and feasibility of carbon border adjustment measures, and based on the EU aviation industry carbon tariff arrangements, further demonstrated the possibility,the origin, the permeability and its far-reaching economic impact of carbon border adjustment measures;(2) innovatively use the poly-centric theorem to explore effective scheme and approach to solve the problem of climate change. This thesis thinks that solve the problem of climate change belongs to the global common goods category, relying solely on one country or a few countries policy arrangement cannot solve the market failure of global common goods.While poly-centric theory show us the way to solve the problem. In order to solve problem of the reduction of global carbon emission, we should through the establish an international competition and cooperation coordination mechanism to deal with the problems of market failure of climate change. Then, proposed an alternative carbon border regulation unit outputs the carbon intensity of the law;(3) Based on the analysis of carbon emissions trading system and carbon tax policy's effect, it proposes the effective practice of carbon emissions trading system, which is the paid carbon emission quota distribution method including the households.(4) It carries on the comparative analysis to3kinds of border carbon adjustment implementation plans by using analytical hierarchy process model. Then it comes to a conclusion that the border carbon adjustment measures only have a deterrent effect to other countries' carbon emission reduction, but have no power to urge other countries to carry on carbon emission reduction. High possible it might evolve into the new trade tariff, form the trade protection and hinder the world free trade. This thesis carries on the comparative analysis to the border carbon adjustment implementation, differentiation center poly centric carbon emissions trading system, standard of unit output density of carbon emission, and the paid carbon emission quota distribution method which includes the households with5evaluation parameters including universality, impartiality, feasibility, the effect of the actual emission reduction and economic efficiency by using analytical hierarchy process model. Then it gives priority sequence scheme for international carbon emission reduction, and selects the best scheme of international carbon emission reduction.
文章的研究思路是：基于减排的贸易政策研究文献以及基础理论的综述,从碳边境调节措施的实施背景、最新进展和各方政策反应的现实出发、对碳边境调节措施的作用机理、在WTO体系下的合法性及其局部均衡效应进行系统阐述,进而对碳边境调节措施的经济效应与贸易影响、实施方案及替代政策的选择等进行深入分析,并针对中国实际提出相关政策建议。文章认为,由于一些国家曲解WTO规则和贸易措施决策机制,碳使GATT一般例外条款被滥用,致使碳边境调节措施违背WTO旨在运用该条款协调贸易与环境发展矛盾的初衷。本文通过分析碳边境调节措施在GATT/WTO框架下的违法性和不可操作性,指出其“以环境保护之名,行贸易保护之实”的本质。在此基础上,文章对与旨在减少转移排放的贸易政策相近的国内政策和国际规则的政策效果进行比较研究,指出了碳边境调节措施是各国利益平衡机制下的贸易保护政策选择的结果。本文试图寻找有效减少碳排放、避免贸易保护主义发生的碳边境调节措施的替代方案,即基于多中心理论建立多中心碳排放交易市场,可以将当今世界各国已经建立起来的分散的碳交易市场以多中心的方式联合起来,来减少温室气体因各碳交易市场的价格差异而出现的转移排放。文章指出为了防止转移排放的发生,应采用碳排放密度控制法,它可以在没有设定排放量最高限额的情形下,促使企业主动寻找低碳环保的生产方法和绿色能源。从国内政策层面,本文指出,要完善现有仅对企业实行的碳排放配额分配方案一一纳入居民家庭的有偿碳排放配额分配法。
本文的主要创新之处：(1)从经济学作用机理、WTO规则的适用性,以及具体实施细节等多个角度,综合论述碳边境调节措施的合法性和可行性,并基于欧盟对航空业实行的碳边境调节的最新进展,进一步论证碳边境调节措施实施的可能性、根源、渗透性及其深远的经济影响；(2)基于多中心理论探讨解决碳排放问题的有效方案途径,从全球公共产品的视角,提出应通过建立一种国际间竞争与合作关系并存的协调机制,来解决全球减少碳排放以应对气候变化的市场失灵问题,进而提出了替代碳边境调节措施的单位产出碳密集度法；(3)基于碳排放交易体系与碳税政策效果的分析,提出建立有效碳排放交易体系的具体做法,即纳入居民家庭的有偿碳排放配额分配法。(4)运用层次分析模型,对碳边境调节措施的3种实施方案进行比较分析,得出结论：碳边境调节措施仅对其他国家的碳减排具有威慑作用,没有直接促进其他国家减排的作用效果,还极有可能演变成新型的贸易壁垒、形成贸易保护,阻碍世界的自由贸易。本文还运用层次分析模型对碳边境调节措施及其3种替代政策：差异化多中心碳排放交易体系、单位产出碳排放密度标准和纳入居民家庭的碳排放交易体系4种碳减排方案,从普及性、公正性、可行性、减排效果和经济效率5个评价指标进行综合比较,排列出国际碳减排的优先方案次序,并选择出国际碳减排的最优方案。
People concerns about the problem of climate change and the problem of global common goods market failure, which lead to a trade policy of greenhouse gas emission reduction-carbon border adjustment. Base on the fact that the transfer of greenhouse gas emission is through two ways:trade and foreign direct investment. Therefore, this thesis researches on the foreign trade policies to reduce the transfer emission, which are carbon border adjustment measures and the choice of their alternative policies. This dissertation makes a comprehensive and systematic study on the mechanism. The trends and the economic impact of carbon border adjustment and its alternative policies.
The research idea of this thesis starts with the foreign trade policies of reducing the transfer emission, and researches on carbon border adjustment measures'implement background as well as policy responses from different parties. The thesis analyses Carbon border adjustment's unlawfulness and Partial equilibrium effects in the system of WTO, then makes analysis of cases on the latest development of this measures, which is the practice of EU aircraft industry's carbon emission border adjustment. The thesis believes that the measures which some countries have been taking of carbon border adjustment have abused of GATT's escape clauses and violated WTO's original intention, which aims to minimize the contradiction between development of trade and environment. By analyzing the illegality and impossibility of carbon border adjustment in the environment of WTO and GATT, the thesis points that the adjustment is implementing trade protection in the name of environment protection. Thesis compares the political effects of carbon border adjustment and the domestic policies and international regulations similar to the external trade policies reducing transfer emission. Then it draws the conclusion that the practice of carbon border the result of trade protection policies'options under the balance mechanism of each country's interests. This thesis attempts to find the alternative projects and balance point of controlling carbon emission effectively and avoiding trade protectionism. It proposes that in the situation of transfer emission, the developed economies may adopt the carbon emission density control method, which is the second best option to reduce carbon emission. And the developing economies can use the Nobel laureate in economics, Elinor Ostrom's poly-centric theory to establish a polycentric carbon emission trading market in the resident households. On the world level, it is workable to unite the dispersed carbon trading markets which the various countries have established to reduce the greenhouse gases' transfer emission.
This thesis analyzes that the basic reasons of the developed economies'abusing of carbon border adjustment measures are the carbon emission responsibility's unreasonable allocation, the ecological orientation of trade policy decision-making mechanism, the trade regulations'improper use in domestic law. The thesis summarizes China's foreign trade and domestic policy adjustments and the results for achieving the low-carbon economy goals It proposes the reasonable countermeasure for China to deal with the developed economies' transfer emission, and to reduce carbon emission effectively from the angles of international organizations, domestic policies and foreign trade policies and measures.
The main innovation of this thesis:(1) from the perspective of the economics mechanism of action, the applicability of WTO rules to analyze the legitimacy and feasibility of carbon border adjustment measures, and based on the EU aviation industry carbon tariff arrangements, further demonstrated the possibility,the origin, the permeability and its far-reaching economic impact of carbon border adjustment measures;(2) innovatively use the poly-centric theorem to explore effective scheme and approach to solve the problem of climate change. This thesis thinks that solve the problem of climate change belongs to the global common goods category, relying solely on one country or a few countries policy arrangement cannot solve the market failure of global common goods.While poly-centric theory show us the way to solve the problem. In order to solve problem of the reduction of global carbon emission, we should through the establish an international competition and cooperation coordination mechanism to deal with the problems of market failure of climate change. Then, proposed an alternative carbon border regulation unit outputs the carbon intensity of the law;(3) Based on the analysis of carbon emissions trading system and carbon tax policy's effect, it proposes the effective practice of carbon emissions trading system, which is the paid carbon emission quota distribution method including the households.(4) It carries on the comparative analysis to3kinds of border carbon adjustment implementation plans by using analytical hierarchy process model. Then it comes to a conclusion that the border carbon adjustment measures only have a deterrent effect to other countries' carbon emission reduction, but have no power to urge other countries to carry on carbon emission reduction. High possible it might evolve into the new trade tariff, form the trade protection and hinder the world free trade. This thesis carries on the comparative analysis to the border carbon adjustment implementation, differentiation center poly centric carbon emissions trading system, standard of unit output density of carbon emission, and the paid carbon emission quota distribution method which includes the households with5evaluation parameters including universality, impartiality, feasibility, the effect of the actual emission reduction and economic efficiency by using analytical hierarchy process model. Then it gives priority sequence scheme for international carbon emission reduction, and selects the best scheme of international carbon emission reduction.
引文
[1]别涛,熊英.国际贸易中的“环境例外”措施[J].中国法学.2004年第4期：120-129.
[2]曹明德.排污权交易制度探析[J].法律科学(西北政法学院学报),2004年第4期：101-103.
[3]曹静,陈粹粹.碳关税措施：当前热点争论与研究综述[J].经济学动态,2010年第1期：79-83.
[4]陈红敏.包含工业生产过程碳排放的产业部门内涵碳研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2009年第3期：25-30.
[5]陈霖,郑乐.警惕贸易顺差背后的“生态逆差”现象——从内涵能源视角看我国的贸易结构调整[J].国际贸易,2008年第11期：46-48.
[6]陈诗一.能源消耗二氧化碳排放与中国工业的可持续发展[J].经济研究,2009年第4期：41-55.
[7]陈向东,王娜.国际贸易框架下出口国能耗一环境成本问题分析[J].国际贸易问题,2006年第3期：117-121.
[8]陈晓旭,王英.国际贸易中内涵碳测量方法研究综述[J].江苏省外国经济学说研究会2011年学术年会论文集.
[9]陈迎,潘家华,谢来辉.中国外贸进出口商品中的内涵能源及其政策含义[J].经济研究,2008年第7期：11-25.
[10]陈莹莹.美国征收“碳关税措施”的意图与我国对策的观点综述[J].经济研究参考2010年第36期：39-45.
[11]崔莹.环境税与WTO贸易规则[D].吉林：吉林大学.2007年4月.
[12]邓柏盛,宋德勇.我国对外贸易、FDI与环境污染之间关系的研究：1995-2005[J].国际贸易问题,2008年第4期：101-108.
[13]邓莉.对用产权制度变革来解决污染权配置问题的探讨[J].工业技术经济,2006年第3期：82-83.
[14]狄琳娜.中国航空业应对欧盟“碳贸易壁垒”的对策建议[J].国际经贸探索.2011年第11期：48-52.
[15]狄琳娜.中国碳排放交易体系的设计方案建议[J].华东经济管理,2012年第11期：158-160.
[16]狄琳娜,王殿华.食品安全技术性贸易措施的经济效应分析——基于市场失灵的视角[J].社会科学家,2011年第6期：63-66.
[17]东艳.全球气候变化博弈中的碳边界调解措施分析[J].世界经济与政治,2010年第7期：65-82.
[18]樊纲,苏铭,曹静.最终消费与碳减排责任的经济学分析[J].经济研究,2010年第1期.
[19]高尚、张鼎.环境壁垒对我国贸易的影响及对策[J].中国林业经济,2006年第3期.
[20]高大伟,周德群,王群伟.国际贸易、R&D技术溢出及其对中国全要素能源效率的影响[J].管理评论,2010年第8期.
[21]高天皎.碳交易及其相关市场的发展现状简述[J].中国矿业.2007年第8期：86-89.
[22]耿涌,董会娟,郗凤明,刘竹.应对气候变化的碳足迹研究综述[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010年第10期.
[23]韩立余.世界贸易组织法[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2010年
[24]何代欣,碳关税措施：机制困境、政治纠葛与经济悖论[J].中国行政管理,2010年第10期.
[25]贺小勇.论世贸组织体制下的环境边境税调整[J].国际商务.1997年第5期：50-53.
[26]黄敏,蒋琴儿.外贸中内涵碳的计算及其变化的因素分解[J].上海经济研究.2010年第3期：68-76.
[27]黄晓凤.“碳关税措施”壁垒对我国高碳产业的影响及应对策略[J].经济纵横,2010年第3期：49-51.
[28]黄志雄.国际贸易新课题：边境碳调节措施与中国的对策[J].中国软科学,2010年第1期：1-9.
[29]贾利军,孟奇娟.金融危机下贸易保护主义的新特点及发展趋势[J].经济师,2010年第11期.
[30]兰宜生,宁学敏.我国出口扩大与能源消耗的一项实证研究[J].财贸经济.2010年第1期：83-89.
[31]李丁,汪云林,,牛文元.出口贸易中的内涵碳计算——以水泥行业为例[J].生态经济.2009年第2期：58-60.
[32]李刚.基于可持续发展的国家物质流分析[J].中国工业经济.2004年第11期：11-18.
[33]李仁真,秦天宝,李勋.WTO与环境保护[M].湖南：湖南科学技术出版社.2006.
[34]林们强.结构变化、效率改进与能源需求预测——以中国电力行业为例[J].经济研究.2003年第5期.：57-65.
[35]林伯强.中国能源问题与能源政策选择[M]北京：煤炭工业出版社.2007.
[36]刘天姿,陈彬.“碳关税措施”措施在GATT/WTO体制中的合法性研究[J].国际经贸探索.2011年第4期：34-39.
[37]卢仁祥.碳关税措施的相关理论机制及其经济影响与启示.生产力研究[J].2011年第7期：3-5.
[38]潘家华.经济要低碳,低碳须经济[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版).2011年第2期：76-81.
[39]潘家华.金融危机、经济发展与节能减排——中国温室气体减排的长远挑战[J].江西社会科学,2009年第7期：14-20.
[40]齐哗,李惠民,徐明.中国进出口贸易中的内涵碳估算[J].中国人口·资源’与环境.2008年第3期：8-13.
[41]齐志新,陈文颖.结构调整还是技术进步?——改革开放后我国能源效率提高的因素分析[J].上海经济研究.2006年第6期：8-16.
[42]邱东,席玮.投入产出生态占用模型及在中国的应用[J].财经问题研究.2008年第8期：18-23.
[43]曲如晓,马建平.贸易与气候变化：国际贸易的新热点[J].国际贸易2009年第7期：39-42.
[44]邵建春.碳关税措施的贸易保护本质及其对发展中国家出口的影响[J].经济经纬.2011年第4期：81-85.
[45]沈可挺.碳关税措施争端及其对中国制造业的影响[J].中国工业经济,2010年第1期：65-74.
[46]沈可挺,李钢.碳关税措施对中国工业品出口的影响——基于可计算一般均衡模型的评估[J].财贸经济.2010年第1期：75-82.
[47]宋俊荣.在WTO框架下对进口内涵碳产品征收碳税的可行性探讨[J].特区经济,2010年第7期：13-15.
[48]孙楠.“碳关税措施”拉大旗扯虎皮?[N].国际商报.2009年8月8日.
[49]唐涛.浅析碳关税措施对中国经济造成的影响和应对策略[J].中国市场.2009年8月8日.
[50]田云,李波,张俊飚.我国农地利用碳排放的阶段特征及因素分解研究[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版).2011年第1期：59-63.
[51]万毅.低碳时代碳关税措施征收的一般均衡分析.[D].湖南大学硕士论文.2010年4月.
[52]王慧.美国气候安全法中的碳关税措施条款及其对我国的影响——兼论我国的诉讼对策[J].法商研究.2010年第5期：21-30
[53]王岷,魏东.《京都议定书》的缺陷分析[J].中国海洋大学学报,2007年第3期：391-394.
[54]王娜,张瑾,王震,陈向东.基于能源消耗的我国国际贸易实证研究[J].国际贸易问题.2007年第8期：9-14.
[55]王群.环境税与WTO的边境税调整制度[J].黑龙江社会科学.2009年第3期：178-181.
[56]王轩.欧美碳交易对我国气候变化应对能力建设的启示[D].上海：上海交通大学,2008.
[57]王正鹏.进出口贸易对中国能源二氧化碳排放影响的初步分析[J].研究与探讨,2008第3期：14-17.
[58]王志华,陈晓雪,陆玉梅.国内低碳经济研究进展[J].管理学家(学术版).2011年第9期.
[59]汪曾涛.碳税征收的国际比较与经验借鉴[J].理论探索.2009年第4期.
[60]魏本勇,王媛,杨会民,方修琦.国际贸易中的内涵碳排放研究综述[J].世界地理研究.2010年第2期：138-147.
[61]魏光明.我国环境税收问题研究[D].中国海洋大学博士论文,2010年5月.
[62]魏圣香.碳关税措施条款研究：基本理论、立法模式与应对之策[J].甘肃政法学院学报.2011年第6期：92-100.
[63]魏文轩.碳关税措施壁垒对我国工业品出口的影响及对策研究[J].生态经济.2011年第8期：120-122.
[64]吴先华,郭际,郭雯倩.基于商品贸易的中美间碳排放转移测算及启示[J].科学学研究.2011年第9期.
[65]吴幼玲.我国进出口商品中内涵能源的行业结构分析[D].厦门：厦门大学2009年4月.
[66]夏蓉.中国进出口贸易中内涵碳排放量分析——基于投入产出模型[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2010年第6期：77-89.
[67]向蓉美.投入入产出法[M].四川成都：西南财经大学出版社.2007.
[68]谢来辉.应对气候变化的边境调节税研究[D].中国社会科学院.2008年5月1日.
[69]谢来辉,陈迎.转移排放问题评析[J].气候变化研究进展,2007年第4期：214-219.
[70]谢来辉,陈迎.中国对碳关税措施问题过度担忧了吗?[J].国际经济评论.2010年第7期.
[71]解振华.以建设低碳生态城市为契机推动绿色低碳发展[J].再生资源与循环经济.
[72]宋德勇,易艳春.外商直接投资与中国碳排放[J].中国人口·资源与环境.2011年第1期.
[73]徐倩.低碳经济对我国外贸发展的影响[D].辽宁大学硕士学位论文.2011年4月.
[74]徐琼玉.促进生态文明的我国贸易结构优化研究[D].大连海事大学硕士学位论文.2009年2月.
[75]闫云凤.中国对外贸易的隐含碳研究.华东师范大学博士论文[D].2011-04-01
[76]闫云凤,杨来科.中国对外贸易的环境效应——以C02排放为例[C].中国经济60年道路、模式与发展：上海市社会科学界第七届学术年会文集(2009年度)经济、管理学科卷.2009年.
[77]杨华,沈灏.碳交易的法律问题初探——《京都议定书》减排机制及我国的应对[J].法治论从(上海政法学院学报),2008年第2期：98-102.
[78]杨宏伟,张敏思.高耗能产品出口对我国能源环境的利弊分析[J].中国能源.2007年第1期：27-29.
[79]杨会民.中国进出口贸易内涵碳的计算与影响因素结构分析[D].天津：天津大学.2009年5月.
[80]印辉.WTO环境规则研究[M].北京：知识产权出版社,2009.
[81]尹显萍,霍达,唐黎.中日商品贸易中内涵能源的分析及其政策含义[J].世界经济研究.2010年第7期：32-37.
[82]尹显萍,程茗.中美商品贸易中的内涵碳分析及其政策含义[J].中国工业经济.2010年第8期.
[83]许耀明.气候变化国际法与WTO规则在解决贸易与环境纠纷中的矛盾与协调[J].政治与法律,2010年第3期：29-39.
[84]于天飞.碳排放权交易的市场研究[D].南京：南京林业大学,2007.
[85]余慧超,王礼茂.中美商品贸易的碳排放转移研究[J].自然资源学报,2009年第10期：1837-1846.
[86]余进.征收碳关税措施对中国出口贸易的影响分析[J].湖南社会科学,2011年第2期：131-135.
[87]曾令良,陈卫东.论WTO一般例外条款(GATT第20条)与我国应有的对策[J].法学论坛.2001年第4期：32-49.
[88]赵玉敏.低碳经济的约束、挑战和机遇[J].国际贸易,2009年第11期：31-36.
[89]张景华.碳税的社会福利效应分析[J].当代经济管理.2010年第8期：76-78.
[90]张明文,张金良,谭忠富,王东海.碳税对经济增长、能源消费与收入分配的影响分析[J].技术经济,2009年第6期：48-51.
[91]张明喜.我国开征碳税的CGE模拟与碳税法条文设计[J].财贸经济,2010第3期：61-66.
[92]张曙霄,郭沛.“碳关税措施”的两重性分析[J].经济学家.2010年第12期.
[93]张晓平.中国对外贸易产生的二氧化碳排放区位转移分析[J].地理学报,2009年第2期.
[94]张向晨.碳关税措施是否符合WTO规则?[J].WTO经济导刊,2009年第12期：87-88.
[95]张炎治,聂锐.我国进出口贸易对能源强度的影响效应[J].中国矿业，2009年第4期：11-14.
[96]郑春芳,赵亚平.“碳关税措施”对我国出口贸易的影响及对策[J].经济纵横.2011年第3期：48-52.
[97]周新.国际贸易中的内涵碳排放核算及贸易调整后的国家温室气体排放[J].管理评论.2010年第6期：17-24.
[98]周跃雪.“碳关税措施”的法律分析——兼论WTO环境规则[J].商业时代.2011年9期：106-107.
[99]钟契夫,陈锡康.投入产出分析[M].北京：中国财政经济出版.1993.
[100]朱榄叶.关税与贸易总协定国际贸易纠纷案例汇编[M].法律出版社.1995年6月第1版.
[101]朱启荣.中国出口贸易中的CO2排放问题研究[J].中国工业经济,2010年第1期：55-64.
[102]宗泊.碳关税措施分析[J].河北法学,2012年第1期.
[103]邹琪,沈煜.碳关税措施的社会福利——结合中国实证的分析[J].经济体制改革.2011年第6期：141-145.
[104]左海聪.GATT环境保护例外条款判例法的发展[J].法学.2008年第3期：127-134.
[105]Ahmad N,Wyckoff.2003.A Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in international trade of goods.OECDDSTI/DOC(2003)15,Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development,November.
[106]Bacchus J.2010.Hoarding resources threatens free trade:a case against China at the WTO is a sign of an emerging new arena for conflict.Wall Street Journal,19 May.
[107]Babiker, Mustafa,2005. Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage. J. International Economics.65,421-445.
[108]Babiker, Mustafa H., Rutherford, Thomas F.,2005. The Economic effects of Border Measures in Subglobal Climate Agreements. Energy J.26 (4),99-126.
[109]Bagwati, J., P.C. Mavroidis.2007. Is Action against U.S. Exports for Failure to Sign Kyoto Protocol WTO-Legal? World Trade Review 6:299-310.
[110]Ball P.,2009.Who should bear the carbon cost of exports?. Nature, available at:http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090306/full/news.2009.133.html.
[111]Boemare C.,andQuirion P.,2002.Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe:lessons from economic literature and international experiences. Ecological Economics,43,213-230.
[112]Bohringer,C.,Lange A.,2005.On the design of optimal grandfathering schemes for emission allowances.European Economics Review,49,2041-2055.
[113]Catherine Marciano and James Franey, "EU Ministers Shun French Carbon Tariff Proposal," (AFP), Jul24,2009, [EB/OL]. http://info-wars. org/2009/07/24/ministers-shun-french-carbon-tariff-proposal/,2009-08-25.
[114]Carbon Trust,2006. Carbon footprints in the supply chain:the next step for business. London:The Carbon Trust.
[115]Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Initiative,2004. Economic input-output Lifecycle assessment (EIO-LCA) model. [EB/OL]. http://www.eiolca.net/index.html.
[116]Chakravarty S,Chikkatur A,Conink H. de,Pacala S,Socolow R,Tavoni M(2009). Sharing global CO2 emission reductions among one billion high emitters. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 106(29):11884-11888.
[117]Cosbey A.(ed.)2008.Trade and Climate Change:Issues in Perspective, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.
[118]Daskalakis G.,Psychoyios D., Markellos R. N.,2009.Modeling CO2 emission allowance prices and derivative:evidence from the European trading scheme.Journal of Banking&Finance,forthcoming. Environmental Protection Agency,EPA/600/R-01/101.
[119]Demailly, D. and P. Quirion,2006. CO2 abatement, competitiveness and leakage in the European cement industry under the EU ETS:grandfathering vs. output-based allocation, Climate Policy,6(1), August 2006, pp.93-113
[120]Demailly, D. and P. Quirion,2008. Changing the Allocation Rules in the EU ETS:Impact on Competitiveness and Economic Efficiency. FEEM Working Paper No.89.2008, October
[121]Demailly, D.,Quirion P.,2008.Leakage from climate policies and border tax adjustment: lessons from a geographic model of the cement industry. In:Guesnerie., Tulkens, H. (Eds.), The Design of Climate Policy.The MIT Press,Cambridge, MA,USA,pp.333-358.
[122]Elissavet M., Denise P.2009. An International Trade Law Perspective on Sectoral Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation Approaches. [EB/OL]http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1417343
[123]Ellerman, A. D.,Buchner, B.,andCarraro,C.,2007,The allocation of European Union allowances:lessons,unifying themes and general principles (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,UK).
[124]Elliott, Joshua, Foster, Ian, Kortum, Samuel, Munson, Todd, Perez Cervantes, Fernando,Weisbach, David,2010. Trade and carbon taxes. Am. Econ. Rev.:Pap. Proc. 100,465-469.
[125]European Parliament and Council of the European Union.2009. The effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community's greenhouse gas emissions reduction commitments up to 2020, Official Journal of the European Union, OJ L 140/136,5 June, European Union, Brussels, June, pp.136-148.
[126]European Parliament and of the Council.2009.Directive 2009/28/EC of the on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, Official Journal of the European Union, OJ L 140/16,5. pp.16-62.
[127]Fishcher C. Fox A.K.,2007. Output-based Allocation of emissions permits for mitigation tax and trade interactions. Land Econ.83(4),575-599.
[128]Frankel J.A.2009. Addressing the leakage/competitiveness issue, (eds), climate change policy proposals. Climate change, trade, and competitiveness:is a collision inevitable?.washington, DC:Brookings Institution Press.
[129]Giles A.,Kirk H.,Giovanni R., Dominique V. M.,2010,Trade In'Virtual Carbon':Empirical Results and Implications for Policy.World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No.5194: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=1547633.
[130]Gros D.2009.Global welfare implications of carbon border taxes [Z].CEPS Working Document No.315,July 6th.
[131]Godal O., Klaassen G.,2006.Carbon trading across sources and periods constrained by the Marrakesh Accords. Journal of Environmental Economics&Management,51,308-322.
[132]Ho M., Morgenstern, R.D., Shih, J. S.,2008. Impact of carbon price policies on U.S. industry. Resources for the future Discussion paper 08-37.
[133]Hubacek K. and Stefan G.,2003.Applying physical input-output analysis to estimate and appropriation (ecological footprints) of international trade activities.Ecological Economics 44(1),137-151.
[134]G. Ipek T.,Serap T.,Elif A.2007. CO2 Emissions vs CO2 Responsibility:An Input-output Approach for the Turkish Economy.Energy Policy, (35):855-868.
[135]IsmerR., Neuhoff K..,2007. Border tax adjustment:a feasible way to support stringent emission trading. Eur. J. Law Econ.24 (2),137-164.
[136]Kurt K., Ina M., Michael W.,2009.The Impact of Technological Change and Lifestyles on the Energy Demand of Households-A Combination of Aggregate and Individual Household Analysis. WIFO Working Papers, No.334.
[137]Lanz B. R., Thomas F., Tilton J.,2010. Subglobal Climate Agreements and the Copper Mining Industry. Working paper.
[138]Lee C.F., Lin S.J., Lewis C 2008. Analysis of the impacts of combining carbon taxation and emission trading on different industry sectors. Energy Policy,36:722-729.
[139]Lockwood B., J. Whalley,2008. Carbon motivated border tax adjustments:Old wine in green bottles?. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper, No. W14025.
[140]Mauricio T. T., Giovani M.,2003. Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change.2003,8(2)
[141]Machado,Giovani,Roberto Schaeffer and Ernst Worrell,2001. Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil:an input-output approach. Ecological Economics39(3):409-424.
[142]Majocchi, A., Missaglia.M.,2002.Environmental taxes and border tax adjustment, Societa Italiana Economia pubblica (SIEP), Working Paper No.127/2002.
[143]Mathiesen L.,Maestad O.2002.Climate policy and steel industry:achieving global emissions reductions by an incomplete climate agreement discussion papers.
[144]Mattoo A., Subranmanian A., vander Mensbrugghe D., He J.,2009.Reconciling climate change and trade policy.World Bank Working Paper,No.WP09-152002.Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Bergen.
[145]Mckibbin W.J.,Wilcoxen J.,2009.The economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments for climate policy.CAMA Working Paper 9/2009,The Australian National University.
[146]Munksgaard J., Klaus A. P.,2001.CO2 accounts for open economies:producer or consumer responsibility? Energy Policy 29(4):327-334.
[147]Muradian R.,Martin O.C.,Joan M.A.,2002. Embodied pollution in trade:estimating the environmental load displacement of industrialized countries. Ecological Economics 41(1):51-67.
[148]Nicolas Loris,2009. An Inconvenient Tariff, Beijing Review. [EB/OL]http://www.bjreview.com.cn/business/txt/2009-07/24/content_209036.htm.
[149]Norihiko Yamano,Dong Guo, Colin Webb,2009. Towards Harmonised Bilateral Trade Data for Inter-Country Input-Output Analyses:Statistical Issues, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/4, OECD Publishing.
[150]Pauwelyn, J.,2007.U.S.federal climate policy and competitiveness concerns:the limits and options of international trade law.Durham,N.C.,Duke University. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.Working Paper, No.07-02.
[151]Peters Glen P., Edgar G. Hertwich,2008.CO2 embodied in international trade with implications for global climate Policy.Environmental Science and Technology. Vol.42,No.5:1401-1407.
[152]Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, Walker, Neil,2008. EU emissions trading and the cement sector:a spatial competition analysis. Climate. Policy 8-5,467-493.
[153]Schaeffer Roberto, Andre Lealdesa,1996. The embodiment of carbon associated with Brazilian imports and exports.Energy Conversion and Management 37(6-8):955-960.
[154]Shui B., Harriss R.,2006. The role of CO2 embodiment in US-China trade. Energy Policy, 34,4063-068.
[155]Stavins R.N.,1998,What can we learn from the grand policy experiment? Lessons from SO2 allowance trading. Journal of Economic Perspectives,12,69-88.
[156]Stern N.,2007. The economics of climate change:the Stern review. (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,UK).
[157]Stiglitz J.,2006.Conference at the Centre for Global Development. [EB/OL].http://www.cgdev.org/doc/events/9.27.06/Sti glitzTrancript9.27.06.pdf
[158]Svendsen G.T., Vesterdal M.,2003.How to design greenhouse gas trading in the EU? Energy Policy,31,1531-1539.
[159]UNEP & WTO,2009. Trade and climate change,A report by the United Nations Environment Program and the World Trade Organization. [EB/OL]. http://www. wto. org/english/res_e/booksp_e/trade_climate_change_e. pdf.
[160]Veenendaal P., Manders T.,2008. Border tax adjustment and the EU-ETS, a quantitative assessment. CPB Document No.171. Central Planning Bureau, The Hague.
[161]Vesterdal M., Svendsen G.T.,2004.How should greenhouse gas permits be allocated in the EU?Energy Policy,32,961-968.
[162]Weber C.L., Peters G, Guan D., Hubacek K.,2008. The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change. Energy Policy 36,3572-3577.
[163]Wiedmann Thomas,2008. The Carbon Footprint and Ecological Footprint of the Scottish Parliament.
[164]Winchester N., Paltsev S., Reilly J.,2011. Will border carbon adjustments work? BE J. Econ. Anal. Poli.11,1-27 Article 7.
[165]Wyckoff A.W,Jospeh M.R.,1994.The embodiment of carbon in imports of manufactured products:implications for international agreements on greenhouse gas emissions.Energy Policy22(3):187-194.
[2]曹明德.排污权交易制度探析[J].法律科学(西北政法学院学报),2004年第4期：101-103.
[3]曹静,陈粹粹.碳关税措施：当前热点争论与研究综述[J].经济学动态,2010年第1期：79-83.
[4]陈红敏.包含工业生产过程碳排放的产业部门内涵碳研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2009年第3期：25-30.
[5]陈霖,郑乐.警惕贸易顺差背后的“生态逆差”现象——从内涵能源视角看我国的贸易结构调整[J].国际贸易,2008年第11期：46-48.
[6]陈诗一.能源消耗二氧化碳排放与中国工业的可持续发展[J].经济研究,2009年第4期：41-55.
[7]陈向东,王娜.国际贸易框架下出口国能耗一环境成本问题分析[J].国际贸易问题,2006年第3期：117-121.
[8]陈晓旭,王英.国际贸易中内涵碳测量方法研究综述[J].江苏省外国经济学说研究会2011年学术年会论文集.
[9]陈迎,潘家华,谢来辉.中国外贸进出口商品中的内涵能源及其政策含义[J].经济研究,2008年第7期：11-25.
[10]陈莹莹.美国征收“碳关税措施”的意图与我国对策的观点综述[J].经济研究参考2010年第36期：39-45.
[11]崔莹.环境税与WTO贸易规则[D].吉林：吉林大学.2007年4月.
[12]邓柏盛,宋德勇.我国对外贸易、FDI与环境污染之间关系的研究：1995-2005[J].国际贸易问题,2008年第4期：101-108.
[13]邓莉.对用产权制度变革来解决污染权配置问题的探讨[J].工业技术经济,2006年第3期：82-83.
[14]狄琳娜.中国航空业应对欧盟“碳贸易壁垒”的对策建议[J].国际经贸探索.2011年第11期：48-52.
[15]狄琳娜.中国碳排放交易体系的设计方案建议[J].华东经济管理,2012年第11期：158-160.
[16]狄琳娜,王殿华.食品安全技术性贸易措施的经济效应分析——基于市场失灵的视角[J].社会科学家,2011年第6期：63-66.
[17]东艳.全球气候变化博弈中的碳边界调解措施分析[J].世界经济与政治,2010年第7期：65-82.
[18]樊纲,苏铭,曹静.最终消费与碳减排责任的经济学分析[J].经济研究,2010年第1期.
[19]高尚、张鼎.环境壁垒对我国贸易的影响及对策[J].中国林业经济,2006年第3期.
[20]高大伟,周德群,王群伟.国际贸易、R&D技术溢出及其对中国全要素能源效率的影响[J].管理评论,2010年第8期.
[21]高天皎.碳交易及其相关市场的发展现状简述[J].中国矿业.2007年第8期：86-89.
[22]耿涌,董会娟,郗凤明,刘竹.应对气候变化的碳足迹研究综述[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2010年第10期.
[23]韩立余.世界贸易组织法[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2010年
[24]何代欣,碳关税措施：机制困境、政治纠葛与经济悖论[J].中国行政管理,2010年第10期.
[25]贺小勇.论世贸组织体制下的环境边境税调整[J].国际商务.1997年第5期：50-53.
[26]黄敏,蒋琴儿.外贸中内涵碳的计算及其变化的因素分解[J].上海经济研究.2010年第3期：68-76.
[27]黄晓凤.“碳关税措施”壁垒对我国高碳产业的影响及应对策略[J].经济纵横,2010年第3期：49-51.
[28]黄志雄.国际贸易新课题：边境碳调节措施与中国的对策[J].中国软科学,2010年第1期：1-9.
[29]贾利军,孟奇娟.金融危机下贸易保护主义的新特点及发展趋势[J].经济师,2010年第11期.
[30]兰宜生,宁学敏.我国出口扩大与能源消耗的一项实证研究[J].财贸经济.2010年第1期：83-89.
[31]李丁,汪云林,,牛文元.出口贸易中的内涵碳计算——以水泥行业为例[J].生态经济.2009年第2期：58-60.
[32]李刚.基于可持续发展的国家物质流分析[J].中国工业经济.2004年第11期：11-18.
[33]李仁真,秦天宝,李勋.WTO与环境保护[M].湖南：湖南科学技术出版社.2006.
[34]林们强.结构变化、效率改进与能源需求预测——以中国电力行业为例[J].经济研究.2003年第5期.：57-65.
[35]林伯强.中国能源问题与能源政策选择[M]北京：煤炭工业出版社.2007.
[36]刘天姿,陈彬.“碳关税措施”措施在GATT/WTO体制中的合法性研究[J].国际经贸探索.2011年第4期：34-39.
[37]卢仁祥.碳关税措施的相关理论机制及其经济影响与启示.生产力研究[J].2011年第7期：3-5.
[38]潘家华.经济要低碳,低碳须经济[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版).2011年第2期：76-81.
[39]潘家华.金融危机、经济发展与节能减排——中国温室气体减排的长远挑战[J].江西社会科学,2009年第7期：14-20.
[40]齐哗,李惠民,徐明.中国进出口贸易中的内涵碳估算[J].中国人口·资源’与环境.2008年第3期：8-13.
[41]齐志新,陈文颖.结构调整还是技术进步?——改革开放后我国能源效率提高的因素分析[J].上海经济研究.2006年第6期：8-16.
[42]邱东,席玮.投入产出生态占用模型及在中国的应用[J].财经问题研究.2008年第8期：18-23.
[43]曲如晓,马建平.贸易与气候变化：国际贸易的新热点[J].国际贸易2009年第7期：39-42.
[44]邵建春.碳关税措施的贸易保护本质及其对发展中国家出口的影响[J].经济经纬.2011年第4期：81-85.
[45]沈可挺.碳关税措施争端及其对中国制造业的影响[J].中国工业经济,2010年第1期：65-74.
[46]沈可挺,李钢.碳关税措施对中国工业品出口的影响——基于可计算一般均衡模型的评估[J].财贸经济.2010年第1期：75-82.
[47]宋俊荣.在WTO框架下对进口内涵碳产品征收碳税的可行性探讨[J].特区经济,2010年第7期：13-15.
[48]孙楠.“碳关税措施”拉大旗扯虎皮?[N].国际商报.2009年8月8日.
[49]唐涛.浅析碳关税措施对中国经济造成的影响和应对策略[J].中国市场.2009年8月8日.
[50]田云,李波,张俊飚.我国农地利用碳排放的阶段特征及因素分解研究[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版).2011年第1期：59-63.
[51]万毅.低碳时代碳关税措施征收的一般均衡分析.[D].湖南大学硕士论文.2010年4月.
[52]王慧.美国气候安全法中的碳关税措施条款及其对我国的影响——兼论我国的诉讼对策[J].法商研究.2010年第5期：21-30
[53]王岷,魏东.《京都议定书》的缺陷分析[J].中国海洋大学学报,2007年第3期：391-394.
[54]王娜,张瑾,王震,陈向东.基于能源消耗的我国国际贸易实证研究[J].国际贸易问题.2007年第8期：9-14.
[55]王群.环境税与WTO的边境税调整制度[J].黑龙江社会科学.2009年第3期：178-181.
[56]王轩.欧美碳交易对我国气候变化应对能力建设的启示[D].上海：上海交通大学,2008.
[57]王正鹏.进出口贸易对中国能源二氧化碳排放影响的初步分析[J].研究与探讨,2008第3期：14-17.
[58]王志华,陈晓雪,陆玉梅.国内低碳经济研究进展[J].管理学家(学术版).2011年第9期.
[59]汪曾涛.碳税征收的国际比较与经验借鉴[J].理论探索.2009年第4期.
[60]魏本勇,王媛,杨会民,方修琦.国际贸易中的内涵碳排放研究综述[J].世界地理研究.2010年第2期：138-147.
[61]魏光明.我国环境税收问题研究[D].中国海洋大学博士论文,2010年5月.
[62]魏圣香.碳关税措施条款研究：基本理论、立法模式与应对之策[J].甘肃政法学院学报.2011年第6期：92-100.
[63]魏文轩.碳关税措施壁垒对我国工业品出口的影响及对策研究[J].生态经济.2011年第8期：120-122.
[64]吴先华,郭际,郭雯倩.基于商品贸易的中美间碳排放转移测算及启示[J].科学学研究.2011年第9期.
[65]吴幼玲.我国进出口商品中内涵能源的行业结构分析[D].厦门：厦门大学2009年4月.
[66]夏蓉.中国进出口贸易中内涵碳排放量分析——基于投入产出模型[J].中南财经政法大学研究生学报,2010年第6期：77-89.
[67]向蓉美.投入入产出法[M].四川成都：西南财经大学出版社.2007.
[68]谢来辉.应对气候变化的边境调节税研究[D].中国社会科学院.2008年5月1日.
[69]谢来辉,陈迎.转移排放问题评析[J].气候变化研究进展,2007年第4期：214-219.
[70]谢来辉,陈迎.中国对碳关税措施问题过度担忧了吗?[J].国际经济评论.2010年第7期.
[71]解振华.以建设低碳生态城市为契机推动绿色低碳发展[J].再生资源与循环经济.
[72]宋德勇,易艳春.外商直接投资与中国碳排放[J].中国人口·资源与环境.2011年第1期.
[73]徐倩.低碳经济对我国外贸发展的影响[D].辽宁大学硕士学位论文.2011年4月.
[74]徐琼玉.促进生态文明的我国贸易结构优化研究[D].大连海事大学硕士学位论文.2009年2月.
[75]闫云凤.中国对外贸易的隐含碳研究.华东师范大学博士论文[D].2011-04-01
[76]闫云凤,杨来科.中国对外贸易的环境效应——以C02排放为例[C].中国经济60年道路、模式与发展：上海市社会科学界第七届学术年会文集(2009年度)经济、管理学科卷.2009年.
[77]杨华,沈灏.碳交易的法律问题初探——《京都议定书》减排机制及我国的应对[J].法治论从(上海政法学院学报),2008年第2期：98-102.
[78]杨宏伟,张敏思.高耗能产品出口对我国能源环境的利弊分析[J].中国能源.2007年第1期：27-29.
[79]杨会民.中国进出口贸易内涵碳的计算与影响因素结构分析[D].天津：天津大学.2009年5月.
[80]印辉.WTO环境规则研究[M].北京：知识产权出版社,2009.
[81]尹显萍,霍达,唐黎.中日商品贸易中内涵能源的分析及其政策含义[J].世界经济研究.2010年第7期：32-37.
[82]尹显萍,程茗.中美商品贸易中的内涵碳分析及其政策含义[J].中国工业经济.2010年第8期.
[83]许耀明.气候变化国际法与WTO规则在解决贸易与环境纠纷中的矛盾与协调[J].政治与法律,2010年第3期：29-39.
[84]于天飞.碳排放权交易的市场研究[D].南京：南京林业大学,2007.
[85]余慧超,王礼茂.中美商品贸易的碳排放转移研究[J].自然资源学报,2009年第10期：1837-1846.
[86]余进.征收碳关税措施对中国出口贸易的影响分析[J].湖南社会科学,2011年第2期：131-135.
[87]曾令良,陈卫东.论WTO一般例外条款(GATT第20条)与我国应有的对策[J].法学论坛.2001年第4期：32-49.
[88]赵玉敏.低碳经济的约束、挑战和机遇[J].国际贸易,2009年第11期：31-36.
[89]张景华.碳税的社会福利效应分析[J].当代经济管理.2010年第8期：76-78.
[90]张明文,张金良,谭忠富,王东海.碳税对经济增长、能源消费与收入分配的影响分析[J].技术经济,2009年第6期：48-51.
[91]张明喜.我国开征碳税的CGE模拟与碳税法条文设计[J].财贸经济,2010第3期：61-66.
[92]张曙霄,郭沛.“碳关税措施”的两重性分析[J].经济学家.2010年第12期.
[93]张晓平.中国对外贸易产生的二氧化碳排放区位转移分析[J].地理学报,2009年第2期.
[94]张向晨.碳关税措施是否符合WTO规则?[J].WTO经济导刊,2009年第12期：87-88.
[95]张炎治,聂锐.我国进出口贸易对能源强度的影响效应[J].中国矿业，2009年第4期：11-14.
[96]郑春芳,赵亚平.“碳关税措施”对我国出口贸易的影响及对策[J].经济纵横.2011年第3期：48-52.
[97]周新.国际贸易中的内涵碳排放核算及贸易调整后的国家温室气体排放[J].管理评论.2010年第6期：17-24.
[98]周跃雪.“碳关税措施”的法律分析——兼论WTO环境规则[J].商业时代.2011年9期：106-107.
[99]钟契夫,陈锡康.投入产出分析[M].北京：中国财政经济出版.1993.
[100]朱榄叶.关税与贸易总协定国际贸易纠纷案例汇编[M].法律出版社.1995年6月第1版.
[101]朱启荣.中国出口贸易中的CO2排放问题研究[J].中国工业经济,2010年第1期：55-64.
[102]宗泊.碳关税措施分析[J].河北法学,2012年第1期.
[103]邹琪,沈煜.碳关税措施的社会福利——结合中国实证的分析[J].经济体制改革.2011年第6期：141-145.
[104]左海聪.GATT环境保护例外条款判例法的发展[J].法学.2008年第3期：127-134.
[105]Ahmad N,Wyckoff.2003.A Carbon dioxide emissions embodied in international trade of goods.OECDDSTI/DOC(2003)15,Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development,November.
[106]Bacchus J.2010.Hoarding resources threatens free trade:a case against China at the WTO is a sign of an emerging new arena for conflict.Wall Street Journal,19 May.
[107]Babiker, Mustafa,2005. Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage. J. International Economics.65,421-445.
[108]Babiker, Mustafa H., Rutherford, Thomas F.,2005. The Economic effects of Border Measures in Subglobal Climate Agreements. Energy J.26 (4),99-126.
[109]Bagwati, J., P.C. Mavroidis.2007. Is Action against U.S. Exports for Failure to Sign Kyoto Protocol WTO-Legal? World Trade Review 6:299-310.
[110]Ball P.,2009.Who should bear the carbon cost of exports?. Nature, available at:http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090306/full/news.2009.133.html.
[111]Boemare C.,andQuirion P.,2002.Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe:lessons from economic literature and international experiences. Ecological Economics,43,213-230.
[112]Bohringer,C.,Lange A.,2005.On the design of optimal grandfathering schemes for emission allowances.European Economics Review,49,2041-2055.
[113]Catherine Marciano and James Franey, "EU Ministers Shun French Carbon Tariff Proposal," (AFP), Jul24,2009, [EB/OL]. http://info-wars. org/2009/07/24/ministers-shun-french-carbon-tariff-proposal/,2009-08-25.
[114]Carbon Trust,2006. Carbon footprints in the supply chain:the next step for business. London:The Carbon Trust.
[115]Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Initiative,2004. Economic input-output Lifecycle assessment (EIO-LCA) model. [EB/OL]. http://www.eiolca.net/index.html.
[116]Chakravarty S,Chikkatur A,Conink H. de,Pacala S,Socolow R,Tavoni M(2009). Sharing global CO2 emission reductions among one billion high emitters. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 106(29):11884-11888.
[117]Cosbey A.(ed.)2008.Trade and Climate Change:Issues in Perspective, Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.
[118]Daskalakis G.,Psychoyios D., Markellos R. N.,2009.Modeling CO2 emission allowance prices and derivative:evidence from the European trading scheme.Journal of Banking&Finance,forthcoming. Environmental Protection Agency,EPA/600/R-01/101.
[119]Demailly, D. and P. Quirion,2006. CO2 abatement, competitiveness and leakage in the European cement industry under the EU ETS:grandfathering vs. output-based allocation, Climate Policy,6(1), August 2006, pp.93-113
[120]Demailly, D. and P. Quirion,2008. Changing the Allocation Rules in the EU ETS:Impact on Competitiveness and Economic Efficiency. FEEM Working Paper No.89.2008, October
[121]Demailly, D.,Quirion P.,2008.Leakage from climate policies and border tax adjustment: lessons from a geographic model of the cement industry. In:Guesnerie., Tulkens, H. (Eds.), The Design of Climate Policy.The MIT Press,Cambridge, MA,USA,pp.333-358.
[122]Elissavet M., Denise P.2009. An International Trade Law Perspective on Sectoral Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation Approaches. [EB/OL]http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1417343
[123]Ellerman, A. D.,Buchner, B.,andCarraro,C.,2007,The allocation of European Union allowances:lessons,unifying themes and general principles (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,UK).
[124]Elliott, Joshua, Foster, Ian, Kortum, Samuel, Munson, Todd, Perez Cervantes, Fernando,Weisbach, David,2010. Trade and carbon taxes. Am. Econ. Rev.:Pap. Proc. 100,465-469.
[125]European Parliament and Council of the European Union.2009. The effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community's greenhouse gas emissions reduction commitments up to 2020, Official Journal of the European Union, OJ L 140/136,5 June, European Union, Brussels, June, pp.136-148.
[126]European Parliament and of the Council.2009.Directive 2009/28/EC of the on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, Official Journal of the European Union, OJ L 140/16,5. pp.16-62.
[127]Fishcher C. Fox A.K.,2007. Output-based Allocation of emissions permits for mitigation tax and trade interactions. Land Econ.83(4),575-599.
[128]Frankel J.A.2009. Addressing the leakage/competitiveness issue, (eds), climate change policy proposals. Climate change, trade, and competitiveness:is a collision inevitable?.washington, DC:Brookings Institution Press.
[129]Giles A.,Kirk H.,Giovanni R., Dominique V. M.,2010,Trade In'Virtual Carbon':Empirical Results and Implications for Policy.World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No.5194: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=1547633.
[130]Gros D.2009.Global welfare implications of carbon border taxes [Z].CEPS Working Document No.315,July 6th.
[131]Godal O., Klaassen G.,2006.Carbon trading across sources and periods constrained by the Marrakesh Accords. Journal of Environmental Economics&Management,51,308-322.
[132]Ho M., Morgenstern, R.D., Shih, J. S.,2008. Impact of carbon price policies on U.S. industry. Resources for the future Discussion paper 08-37.
[133]Hubacek K. and Stefan G.,2003.Applying physical input-output analysis to estimate and appropriation (ecological footprints) of international trade activities.Ecological Economics 44(1),137-151.
[134]G. Ipek T.,Serap T.,Elif A.2007. CO2 Emissions vs CO2 Responsibility:An Input-output Approach for the Turkish Economy.Energy Policy, (35):855-868.
[135]IsmerR., Neuhoff K..,2007. Border tax adjustment:a feasible way to support stringent emission trading. Eur. J. Law Econ.24 (2),137-164.
[136]Kurt K., Ina M., Michael W.,2009.The Impact of Technological Change and Lifestyles on the Energy Demand of Households-A Combination of Aggregate and Individual Household Analysis. WIFO Working Papers, No.334.
[137]Lanz B. R., Thomas F., Tilton J.,2010. Subglobal Climate Agreements and the Copper Mining Industry. Working paper.
[138]Lee C.F., Lin S.J., Lewis C 2008. Analysis of the impacts of combining carbon taxation and emission trading on different industry sectors. Energy Policy,36:722-729.
[139]Lockwood B., J. Whalley,2008. Carbon motivated border tax adjustments:Old wine in green bottles?. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper, No. W14025.
[140]Mauricio T. T., Giovani M.,2003. Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change.2003,8(2)
[141]Machado,Giovani,Roberto Schaeffer and Ernst Worrell,2001. Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil:an input-output approach. Ecological Economics39(3):409-424.
[142]Majocchi, A., Missaglia.M.,2002.Environmental taxes and border tax adjustment, Societa Italiana Economia pubblica (SIEP), Working Paper No.127/2002.
[143]Mathiesen L.,Maestad O.2002.Climate policy and steel industry:achieving global emissions reductions by an incomplete climate agreement discussion papers.
[144]Mattoo A., Subranmanian A., vander Mensbrugghe D., He J.,2009.Reconciling climate change and trade policy.World Bank Working Paper,No.WP09-152002.Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Bergen.
[145]Mckibbin W.J.,Wilcoxen J.,2009.The economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments for climate policy.CAMA Working Paper 9/2009,The Australian National University.
[146]Munksgaard J., Klaus A. P.,2001.CO2 accounts for open economies:producer or consumer responsibility? Energy Policy 29(4):327-334.
[147]Muradian R.,Martin O.C.,Joan M.A.,2002. Embodied pollution in trade:estimating the environmental load displacement of industrialized countries. Ecological Economics 41(1):51-67.
[148]Nicolas Loris,2009. An Inconvenient Tariff, Beijing Review. [EB/OL]http://www.bjreview.com.cn/business/txt/2009-07/24/content_209036.htm.
[149]Norihiko Yamano,Dong Guo, Colin Webb,2009. Towards Harmonised Bilateral Trade Data for Inter-Country Input-Output Analyses:Statistical Issues, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/4, OECD Publishing.
[150]Pauwelyn, J.,2007.U.S.federal climate policy and competitiveness concerns:the limits and options of international trade law.Durham,N.C.,Duke University. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.Working Paper, No.07-02.
[151]Peters Glen P., Edgar G. Hertwich,2008.CO2 embodied in international trade with implications for global climate Policy.Environmental Science and Technology. Vol.42,No.5:1401-1407.
[152]Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, Walker, Neil,2008. EU emissions trading and the cement sector:a spatial competition analysis. Climate. Policy 8-5,467-493.
[153]Schaeffer Roberto, Andre Lealdesa,1996. The embodiment of carbon associated with Brazilian imports and exports.Energy Conversion and Management 37(6-8):955-960.
[154]Shui B., Harriss R.,2006. The role of CO2 embodiment in US-China trade. Energy Policy, 34,4063-068.
[155]Stavins R.N.,1998,What can we learn from the grand policy experiment? Lessons from SO2 allowance trading. Journal of Economic Perspectives,12,69-88.
[156]Stern N.,2007. The economics of climate change:the Stern review. (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,UK).
[157]Stiglitz J.,2006.Conference at the Centre for Global Development. [EB/OL].http://www.cgdev.org/doc/events/9.27.06/Sti glitzTrancript9.27.06.pdf
[158]Svendsen G.T., Vesterdal M.,2003.How to design greenhouse gas trading in the EU? Energy Policy,31,1531-1539.
[159]UNEP & WTO,2009. Trade and climate change,A report by the United Nations Environment Program and the World Trade Organization. [EB/OL]. http://www. wto. org/english/res_e/booksp_e/trade_climate_change_e. pdf.
[160]Veenendaal P., Manders T.,2008. Border tax adjustment and the EU-ETS, a quantitative assessment. CPB Document No.171. Central Planning Bureau, The Hague.
[161]Vesterdal M., Svendsen G.T.,2004.How should greenhouse gas permits be allocated in the EU?Energy Policy,32,961-968.
[162]Weber C.L., Peters G, Guan D., Hubacek K.,2008. The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change. Energy Policy 36,3572-3577.
[163]Wiedmann Thomas,2008. The Carbon Footprint and Ecological Footprint of the Scottish Parliament.
[164]Winchester N., Paltsev S., Reilly J.,2011. Will border carbon adjustments work? BE J. Econ. Anal. Poli.11,1-27 Article 7.
[165]Wyckoff A.W,Jospeh M.R.,1994.The embodiment of carbon in imports of manufactured products:implications for international agreements on greenhouse gas emissions.Energy Policy22(3):187-194.