中国能源密集型产品贸易的环境扭曲效应及矫正机理研究
|
摘要
比较利益是各国参与贸易的根本动因,也是理论界历来研究的重点。但传统贸易理论几乎很少考虑当代贸易中日益显著的环境效应及其对比较利益的影响,致使众多模型对当代贸易现实的解释发生偏离。随着环境资源日渐稀缺,部分学者开始打破这一窠臼,对贸易的环境效应问题展开分析。尽管如此,这些研究却往往忽视环境资源价格扭曲与“市场失灵”等重要的现实因素,因而也就忽略了环境效应与比较利益等方面的潜在扭曲效应。鉴于此,本文立足于中国要素(含环境资源)比价扭曲的现状,针对密集使用环境资源且在中国货物贸易中占据重要地位的能源密集型产品,对贸易的环境扭曲效应问题进行理论与实证分析。
能源密集型产品贸易的环境影响可归结为规模、结构、技术三大效应,本文则揭示并验证了技术效应在其中的重要地位及其作用机理与影响因素,论证贸易参与方可通过提高人均收入水平、完善市场经济体制、加强清洁生产技术研发与人力资本积累、构建环境资源价格体系等多方面的努力,实现并扩大正向技术效应,从而尽可能使贸易有利于环境质量改善。
通过改变技术效应以抑弊扬利的成效,却受到现实中要素比价扭曲的制约。基于要素比价扭曲的现状,对能源密集型产品贸易的环境效应进行理论分析与量值估计。结果表明,在要素比价扭曲的情况下,中国此类产品贸易的结构效应会发生方向或量值的扭曲,并会进一步制约正向技术效应的实现和扩大,从而导致贸易的环境效应发生一定形式的扭曲,即本文所定义的环境扭曲效应Ⅰ。
随着贸易以某种扭曲的形式改变环境资源的相对稀缺性,中国能源密集型产品生产与出口部门使用此类资源而发生的环境代价势必受到影响。基于此类产品生产的要素特征,可将环境代价定义为能源机会成本与环境容量资源成本两个层次。其中,前者与中国落后生产方式所致的高能耗特征紧密相关,后者则反映了与污染相关的环境容量资源的动态相对稀缺性,并可采用大量、连续、竞争性的排污权交易形成的价格进行估算。其结果表明,中国在此类产品的出口贸易中发生了巨大的环境代价,但这些代价却并不包含于生产成本和出口价格中。因此,在要素比价扭曲的情况下,中国此类产品出口贸易的比较利益会发生扭曲,本文称之为环境扭曲效应Ⅱ。
从理论上看,矫正上述双重环境扭曲效应的根本途径在于调整要素比价,逐步使产品的生产成本和出口价格包含相应的环境代价。然而,由于中国仅仅是能源密集型产品国际市场价格的接受者,且产品出口量额对出口价格的弹性大多为负,倘若中国实施环境代价的内部化并提高出口价格,将会导致出口量额减少,从而形成矫正环境扭曲效应与获取贸易利得之间的“两难”。对此所作的权衡表明,尽管调整要素比价是矫正环境扭曲效应并实现比较利益“净”增进的根本途径,但其方式与措施的设计却应能够使微观经济主体形成实施此类措施的内生激励,从而化解上述“两难”。
为此,一个明智的选择是积极运用清洁发展机制(CDM)并有针对性地对其进行拓展与完善。通过与专业化的清洁生产技术创新和应用相关联、引入行业协会或企业联盟以及政府规划与协调下的专业化主体等多种途径,将可构建以多重激励相容为特征的新型CDM。这一新型模式可在调整要素比价的同时,使贸易对象、专业化主体等相关各方实现利益共赢、并向利益共生过渡,从而化解上述“两难”、经济且可持续地矫正环境扭曲效应。
综上所述,本文尝试在以下方面作出创新:第一,突破现有贸易环境效应研究多限于规模、结构、技术等效应分解的窠臼,揭示并验证了技术效应的重要地位、影响因素及其与结构效应的潜在关联。第二,针对中国要素比价扭曲的现状进行拓展研究,逐层剖析了中国能源密集型产品贸易的双重环境扭曲效应,以及矫正环境扭曲效应与获取贸易利得之间可能的“两难”。第三,构建以多重激励相容为特征的新型CDM,以此化解上述“两难”、经济且可持续地矫正环境扭曲效应。通过以上创新性探索,不仅可拓展现有诸多理论,增强其对当代贸易现实的解释力;而且对于中国在能源密集型产品贸易、清洁生产技术创新和应用以及环境保护之间形成良性互动、实现比较利益增进,亦具有重要的现实意义。
Comparative benefits are the essential motive for international trade, and also the keystone of academic research. However, traditional trade theories tend to ignore the increasingly significant environmental effects of trade and their impacts on comparative benefits, which makes them inadequate for the explanation of realities. With environmental resources becoming more and more scarer, some scholars make a breakthrough in their analyses on trade's environmental effects. Nevertheless, they barely consider the distortion in prices of environmental resources and the resulting market failure, which in all probability will cause distortions in many aspects of trade realities including environmental effects and comparative benefits. In view of the above, this paper studies the environmental distortion effects of trade theoretically and empirically on the basis of price distortion and typical goods, namely energy-intensive goods which intensively use environmental resources during production and meanwhile take up a large portion of trade volume.
According to present research, the environmental effects of energy-intensive goods trade can be decomposed into scale effect, composition effect and technique effect. Further, this paper demonstrates the importance of technique effect as well as its sources and influencing factors. It is argued that trade parties can achieve and augment positive technique effect by certain measures aimed to raise income level, perfect market economy and strengthen cleaner technology R&D and human capital accumulation as well as establishing market prices of environmental resources.
Even so, the effectiveness of these measures is subject to the restriction of price distortion. Based on theoretical analyses and magnitude estimations of environmental effects in circumstances of distorted prices, it is found that a distortion in the composition effect of China's energy-intensive goods trade has come into being, which will further impede the generation and expansion of positive technique effect. As a result, China is undergoing a distortion in trade's environmental effects, which is defined as Environmental Distortion Effect I .
Furthermore, while trade changes the scarcity of environmental resources in a distorted way, the environmental costs of using these resources will be affected. On account of the production factors of energy-intesive goods, relevant environmental costs can be defined as the composition of opportunity costs of energy use and factor costs of environmental capability. The former is related to low energy efficiency of China's energy-intensive industries, while the latter is concerned with high pollution and its intensive use of environmental capability, the scarcity of which is reflected by prices of large-scale continuous competitive emission trading. Based on this definition, this paper estimates China's increasingly huge environmental costs of producing and exporting energy-intensive goods. Since such costs are barely covered in production costs and product prices, China is virtually making a great loss rather than slender profits from the export of these goods. It is found that China is suffering from a distortion in comparative benefits when exporting these goods, which is defined as Environmental Distortion Effect II.
Theoretically, it is essential to establish sound market prices of environmental resources and gradually internalize environmental costs so as to rectify the above environmental distortion effects. However, being a price-taker on the international market for energy-intensive goods and showing negative elasticity of export value with regard to export price, China may well lose some gains from export while internalizing environmental costs and raising export price. A dilemma will come into being between rectifying environmental distortion effects and achieving gains from trade. Its tradeoff, however, suggests that the specific measures to internalize environmental costs should solve the above dilemma and urge enterprises to generate endogeneous incentives of adopting such measures.
To this end, it makes sense that Chinese energy-intensive industries take the initiative to utilize and develop the Clean Development Mechanism. By means of coupling with specialized innovation and application of cleaner techonology, and introducing industry association or enterprise alliance as well as enterprises specialized in CDM deal under government's planning and coordination, a developed mode of CDM characterized by multiple incentive compatibility can be established. By virtue of this developed mode, China will be able to rectify price distortion while in the meantime achieve win-win and symbiotic benefits with relevant parties including importers and specialized enterprises. Hereby, the foregoing environmental distortion effects can be rectified in an economic and sustainable way.
To sum up, this paper aims to make progress in the following apects. Firstly, it furthers research on trade's environmental effects by demonstrating the importance of techinique effect and its influencing factors, as well as its potential relation to compositon effect. Secondly, on the grounds of price distortion in reality, it studies stage by stage the environmental distortion effects in China's energy-intensive goods trade, and the dilemma between rectifying distortions and achieving gains from trade. Lastly, it advances an economic and sustainable rectifying mechanism characterized by multiple incentive compaitibility. All these original analyses help improve trade theories and strengthen their explanatory power of realities. Meanwhile, they are also beneficial for the benign interaction among energy-intensive goods trade, cleaner techonology innovation and application as well as environmental protection, and therefore have realistic significance to China's enhancement of comparative benefits.
能源密集型产品贸易的环境影响可归结为规模、结构、技术三大效应,本文则揭示并验证了技术效应在其中的重要地位及其作用机理与影响因素,论证贸易参与方可通过提高人均收入水平、完善市场经济体制、加强清洁生产技术研发与人力资本积累、构建环境资源价格体系等多方面的努力,实现并扩大正向技术效应,从而尽可能使贸易有利于环境质量改善。
通过改变技术效应以抑弊扬利的成效,却受到现实中要素比价扭曲的制约。基于要素比价扭曲的现状,对能源密集型产品贸易的环境效应进行理论分析与量值估计。结果表明,在要素比价扭曲的情况下,中国此类产品贸易的结构效应会发生方向或量值的扭曲,并会进一步制约正向技术效应的实现和扩大,从而导致贸易的环境效应发生一定形式的扭曲,即本文所定义的环境扭曲效应Ⅰ。
随着贸易以某种扭曲的形式改变环境资源的相对稀缺性,中国能源密集型产品生产与出口部门使用此类资源而发生的环境代价势必受到影响。基于此类产品生产的要素特征,可将环境代价定义为能源机会成本与环境容量资源成本两个层次。其中,前者与中国落后生产方式所致的高能耗特征紧密相关,后者则反映了与污染相关的环境容量资源的动态相对稀缺性,并可采用大量、连续、竞争性的排污权交易形成的价格进行估算。其结果表明,中国在此类产品的出口贸易中发生了巨大的环境代价,但这些代价却并不包含于生产成本和出口价格中。因此,在要素比价扭曲的情况下,中国此类产品出口贸易的比较利益会发生扭曲,本文称之为环境扭曲效应Ⅱ。
从理论上看,矫正上述双重环境扭曲效应的根本途径在于调整要素比价,逐步使产品的生产成本和出口价格包含相应的环境代价。然而,由于中国仅仅是能源密集型产品国际市场价格的接受者,且产品出口量额对出口价格的弹性大多为负,倘若中国实施环境代价的内部化并提高出口价格,将会导致出口量额减少,从而形成矫正环境扭曲效应与获取贸易利得之间的“两难”。对此所作的权衡表明,尽管调整要素比价是矫正环境扭曲效应并实现比较利益“净”增进的根本途径,但其方式与措施的设计却应能够使微观经济主体形成实施此类措施的内生激励,从而化解上述“两难”。
为此,一个明智的选择是积极运用清洁发展机制(CDM)并有针对性地对其进行拓展与完善。通过与专业化的清洁生产技术创新和应用相关联、引入行业协会或企业联盟以及政府规划与协调下的专业化主体等多种途径,将可构建以多重激励相容为特征的新型CDM。这一新型模式可在调整要素比价的同时,使贸易对象、专业化主体等相关各方实现利益共赢、并向利益共生过渡,从而化解上述“两难”、经济且可持续地矫正环境扭曲效应。
综上所述,本文尝试在以下方面作出创新:第一,突破现有贸易环境效应研究多限于规模、结构、技术等效应分解的窠臼,揭示并验证了技术效应的重要地位、影响因素及其与结构效应的潜在关联。第二,针对中国要素比价扭曲的现状进行拓展研究,逐层剖析了中国能源密集型产品贸易的双重环境扭曲效应,以及矫正环境扭曲效应与获取贸易利得之间可能的“两难”。第三,构建以多重激励相容为特征的新型CDM,以此化解上述“两难”、经济且可持续地矫正环境扭曲效应。通过以上创新性探索,不仅可拓展现有诸多理论,增强其对当代贸易现实的解释力;而且对于中国在能源密集型产品贸易、清洁生产技术创新和应用以及环境保护之间形成良性互动、实现比较利益增进,亦具有重要的现实意义。
Comparative benefits are the essential motive for international trade, and also the keystone of academic research. However, traditional trade theories tend to ignore the increasingly significant environmental effects of trade and their impacts on comparative benefits, which makes them inadequate for the explanation of realities. With environmental resources becoming more and more scarer, some scholars make a breakthrough in their analyses on trade's environmental effects. Nevertheless, they barely consider the distortion in prices of environmental resources and the resulting market failure, which in all probability will cause distortions in many aspects of trade realities including environmental effects and comparative benefits. In view of the above, this paper studies the environmental distortion effects of trade theoretically and empirically on the basis of price distortion and typical goods, namely energy-intensive goods which intensively use environmental resources during production and meanwhile take up a large portion of trade volume.
According to present research, the environmental effects of energy-intensive goods trade can be decomposed into scale effect, composition effect and technique effect. Further, this paper demonstrates the importance of technique effect as well as its sources and influencing factors. It is argued that trade parties can achieve and augment positive technique effect by certain measures aimed to raise income level, perfect market economy and strengthen cleaner technology R&D and human capital accumulation as well as establishing market prices of environmental resources.
Even so, the effectiveness of these measures is subject to the restriction of price distortion. Based on theoretical analyses and magnitude estimations of environmental effects in circumstances of distorted prices, it is found that a distortion in the composition effect of China's energy-intensive goods trade has come into being, which will further impede the generation and expansion of positive technique effect. As a result, China is undergoing a distortion in trade's environmental effects, which is defined as Environmental Distortion Effect I .
Furthermore, while trade changes the scarcity of environmental resources in a distorted way, the environmental costs of using these resources will be affected. On account of the production factors of energy-intesive goods, relevant environmental costs can be defined as the composition of opportunity costs of energy use and factor costs of environmental capability. The former is related to low energy efficiency of China's energy-intensive industries, while the latter is concerned with high pollution and its intensive use of environmental capability, the scarcity of which is reflected by prices of large-scale continuous competitive emission trading. Based on this definition, this paper estimates China's increasingly huge environmental costs of producing and exporting energy-intensive goods. Since such costs are barely covered in production costs and product prices, China is virtually making a great loss rather than slender profits from the export of these goods. It is found that China is suffering from a distortion in comparative benefits when exporting these goods, which is defined as Environmental Distortion Effect II.
Theoretically, it is essential to establish sound market prices of environmental resources and gradually internalize environmental costs so as to rectify the above environmental distortion effects. However, being a price-taker on the international market for energy-intensive goods and showing negative elasticity of export value with regard to export price, China may well lose some gains from export while internalizing environmental costs and raising export price. A dilemma will come into being between rectifying environmental distortion effects and achieving gains from trade. Its tradeoff, however, suggests that the specific measures to internalize environmental costs should solve the above dilemma and urge enterprises to generate endogeneous incentives of adopting such measures.
To this end, it makes sense that Chinese energy-intensive industries take the initiative to utilize and develop the Clean Development Mechanism. By means of coupling with specialized innovation and application of cleaner techonology, and introducing industry association or enterprise alliance as well as enterprises specialized in CDM deal under government's planning and coordination, a developed mode of CDM characterized by multiple incentive compatibility can be established. By virtue of this developed mode, China will be able to rectify price distortion while in the meantime achieve win-win and symbiotic benefits with relevant parties including importers and specialized enterprises. Hereby, the foregoing environmental distortion effects can be rectified in an economic and sustainable way.
To sum up, this paper aims to make progress in the following apects. Firstly, it furthers research on trade's environmental effects by demonstrating the importance of techinique effect and its influencing factors, as well as its potential relation to compositon effect. Secondly, on the grounds of price distortion in reality, it studies stage by stage the environmental distortion effects in China's energy-intensive goods trade, and the dilemma between rectifying distortions and achieving gains from trade. Lastly, it advances an economic and sustainable rectifying mechanism characterized by multiple incentive compaitibility. All these original analyses help improve trade theories and strengthen their explanatory power of realities. Meanwhile, they are also beneficial for the benign interaction among energy-intensive goods trade, cleaner techonology innovation and application as well as environmental protection, and therefore have realistic significance to China's enhancement of comparative benefits.
引文
[1] Agras J & Chapman D. A dynamic approach to the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis [J]. Ecological Economics, 1999, 28(2): 267-277
[2] Altamirano-Cabrera JC& Finus M. Permit trading and stability of international climate agreements [J]. Journal of Applied Economics, 2006, Ⅸ(1): 19-47
[3] Anderson K. The standard welfare economics of policies affecting trade and environment. In Anderson K & Blackhurst R eds., The greening of world trade issues [M]. Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press, 1992
[4] Ang BW & Choi KH. Decomposition of aggregate energy and gas emission intensities for industry: a refined Divisia index method [J]. The Energy Journal,1997, 18(3): 59-73
[5] Ang BW & Liu FL. A new energy decomposition method: perfect in decomposition and consistent in aggregation [J]. Energy, 2001, 26(6); 537-546
[6] Ang BW & Pandiyan G Decomposition of energy-induced CO_2 emissions in manufacturing [J]. Energy Economics, 1997, 19:363-374
[7] Ang BW & Zhang FQ. A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy and environmental studies [J]. Energy, 2000, 25:1149-1176
[8] Ang BW. Decomposition methodology in industrial energy demand analysis [J].Energy, 1995,20(11): 1081-1095
[9] Antweiler W, Copeland B & Taylor M. Is free trade good for the environment? [J]. American Economic Review, 2001,91: 877-908
[10] Bandara J & Coxhead I. Can trade liberalization have environmental benefits in developing country agriculture? A Sri Lankan case study [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 1999, 21(3): 349-374
[11] Barrett S. Strategic environmental policy and international trade [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 1994, 54: 325-338
[12] Barron R. Market power and market access in international GHG emissions trading [R]. IEA Information Paper, Paris, IEA, 1999
[13] Baumol WJ & Oates WE. The theory of environmental policy [M]. London,Cambridge University Press, 1988
[14] Baumol WJ. Environmental protection, international spillovers and trade [M].Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell, 1971
[15] Beghin J & Portier M. Effects of trade liberalization on the environment in the manufacturing sector [J]. World Economy, 1997, 20: 435-456
[16] Benarroch M & Thille H. Transboundary pollution and the gains from trade [J].Journal of International Economics, 2001, 55(1): 139-159
[17] Bergstrom TC and Goodman RP. Private demands for public goods [J]. The American Economic Review, 1973, 63(3): 280-296
[18] Bernard A & Jensen JB. Exceptional exporters performance: cause, effect or both? [J]. Journal of International Economics, 1999,47: 1-25
[19] Birdsall N & Wheeler D. Trade policy and industrial pollution in Latin America: where are the pollution havens? [J]. Journal of Environment and Development,1993, 2: 137-149
[20] Bohm P. International greenhouse gas emission trading— with special refrence to the Kyoto Protocol.In Carraro C ed., Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy [M]. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000
[21] Bohringer C & Loschel A. Market power in international emission trading—the impacts of US withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol [R]. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) Discussion Paper No.01-58,2001
[22] Bruvoll A & Medin H. Factoring the environmental Kuznets curve— evidence from Norway [R]. Statistics Norway Discussion Paper No. 275, 2000
[23] Bruvoll A & Medin H. Factors behind the environmental Kuznets curve— a decomposition of the changes in air pollution [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2003, 24: 27-48
[24] Buonanno P, Carraro C & Galeotti M. Endogenous induced technical change and the costs of Kyoto [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2003, 25: 11 -34
[25] Buonanno P, Carraro C, Castelnuovo E, et al. Emission trading restrictions with endogenous technological change [J]. International Environmental Agreements:Politics, Law and Economics, 2001,1: 379-395
[26] Carraro C & Galeotti M. Does endogenous technical change make a difference in climate change policy analysis? A robustness exercise with the FEEM-RICE Model. In Carraro C ed., Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy [M].Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000
[27] Cason T, Gangadharan L & Duke C. Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria [J]. Ecological Economics, 2003,46: 469-491
[28] Chilchilnisky G North-South trade and the global environment [J]. American Economic Review, 1994, 84: 851-874
[29] Coe D & Helpman E. International R&D spillovers [J]. European Economic Review, 1995,39:859-887
[30] Coe D, Helpman E & Hoffmaister A. North-South R&D spillovers [J]. Economic Journal, 1997,107: 134-150
[31] Cole MA & Elliot RJR. Determining the trade-environment composition effect: the role of capital, labor and environmental regulations [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2003,46: 363-383
[32] Cole MA, Rayner AJ & Bates. Trade liberalisation and the environment: the case of the Uruguay round [J]. World Economy, 1998, 21(3): 337-347
[33] Cole MA. Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages [J]. Ecological Economics, 2004,48: 71-81
[34] Conrad K. Taxes and subsidies for pollution-intensive industries and trade policy [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1993, 25:121-135
[35] Copeland B & Taylor M. A simple model of trade, capital mobility and the environment [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 5898, 1997
[36] Copeland B & Taylor M. North-South trade and the environment [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1994,109: 755-787
[37] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade and the environment: a partial synthesis [J].American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1995a, 77: 765-771
[38] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade and transboundary pollution [J]. American Economic Review, 1995b, 85(4): 716-737
[39] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade, growth and the environment [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004,42(1): 7-71
[40] Criqui P, Mima S, Viguier L. Marginal abatement costs of CO_2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the POLES model [J]. Energy Policy, 1999, 27: 585-601
[41] Daly H & Goodland R. An ecological assessment of deregulation of international commerce under GATT [J]. Ecological Economics, 1994,9: 73-92
[42] Dean JM. Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test [J].Canadian Journal of Economics, 2002, 35(4): 819-842
[43] Dean JM. Trade and environment: a survey of the Literature. In Low P ed.,International Trade and the Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO.159, 1992
[44] Dessus S & Bussolo M. Is there a trade-off between trade liberalization and pollution abatement? A computable general equilibrium assessment applied to Costa Rica [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 1998, 20(1): 11-31
[45] Doblin C. Declining energy intensity in the US manufacturing sector [J]. The Energy Journal, 1988,9(2): 109-135
[46] Dornbusch R, Fischer S, Samuelson PA. Comparative advantage, trade and payments in a Ricardian model with a continuum of goods [J]. American Economic Review, 1977, LX VII: 823-839
[47] Dua A & Esty D. Sustaining the Asia Pacific miracle [M]. Washington DC,Institute for International Economics, 1997
[48] Ebert U. Environmental goods and the distribution of income [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 2003, 25(4): 435-459
[49] Ederington J & Minier J. Is environmental policy a secondary trade barrier? An empirical analysis [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 2003, 36: 137-154
[50] Eliste P & Fredriksson P. Does open trade result in a race to the bottom?Cross-country evidence [C]. World Bank Conference on Trade, Global Policy and the Environment, Washington DC, 1998
[51] Ellerman AD & Decaux A. Analysis of post-Kyoto CO_2 emissions trading using marginal abatement curves [R]. MIT Joint Programme on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No.40,1998
[52] Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). National Air Pollution Emissions Estimates, 1940- 1990 [M]. Washington DC: EPA-450/4-91-026,1991
[53] Esty D & Geradin D. Market access, competitiveness, and harmonization:environmental protection in regional trade agreements [J]. The Harvard Environmental Law Review, 1997,21: 265-336
[54] European Commission. Competitiveness of and access to cost-effective energy inputs for energy intensive industries [R]. High Level Group on Competitiveness, Energy and Environment, 2006
[55] Falvey R, Foster N & Greenaway D. North-South trade, knowledge spillovers and growth [J]. Journal of Economic Integration, 2002, 17: 650-670
[56] Falvey R, Foster N, & Greenaway D. Imports, exports, knowledge spillovers and growth [J]. Economics Letters, 2004, 85: 209-213
[57] Fichtner W, Graehl S & Rentz O. The impacts of private investor's transaction costs on the cost effectiveness of project-bases Kyoto mechanisms [J]. Climate Policy, 2003, 3: 249-259
[58] Fischer C. Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: balancing trade-offs with baselines [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 1807-1823
[59] Funk M. Trade and international R&D spillovers among OECD countries [J]. Southern Economic Journal, 2001, 67: 725-737
[60] Ganadharan L. Transaction costs in pollution markets: an empirical study [J].Land Economics, 2000, 76(4): 601-614
[61] Girma S, Greenaway D & Kneller R. Export market exit and performance dynamics [J]. Economics Letters, 2003, 80: 181-187
[62] Glasson J, Therivel R & Chadwick A. Introduction to environmental impact assessment [M]. Taylor & Francis, 2005
[63] Godby R. Market power and emission trading: theory and laboratory results [J].Pacific Economic Review, 2000,5(3): 349-363
[64] Godby R. Market power in laboratory emission permit markets [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 2002, 23: 279-318
[65] Greening L, Davis B & Schipper L. Decomposition of aggregate carbon intensity for the manufacturing sector: comparison of declining trends from ten OECD countries for the period 1971 to 1991 [J]. Energy Economics, 1998,20(1): 43-65
[66] Greening L, Davis W, Schipper L, et al. Comparisons of six decomposition methods: application to aggregate energy intensity for manufacturing in ten OECD countries [J]. Energy Economics, 1997, 19(3): 375-390
[67] Greening L. Effects of human behavior on aggregate carbon intensity of personal transportation: comparison of the OECD countries for the period 1970 to 1993 [J]. Energy Economics, 2004, 26(1) 1-30
[68] Grossman G & Krueger A. Environmental impacts of a North America Free Trade Agreement [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 3914,1991
[69] Grossman G & Krueger A. Environmental impacts of a North America Free Trade Agreement. In Garber P ed., The US-Mexico Free Trade Agreement [M].Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1993
[70] Graver G. Optimal investment in pollution control capital in a neoclassical growth context [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1976, 3(3): 165-177
[71] Hahn R. Market power and transferable property rights [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1984, November: 753-765
[72] Hamwey R & Baranzini A. Sizing the global GHG offset market [J]. Eergy Policy, 1999,27: 123-127
[73] Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons [J]. Science, 1968,162(13): 1243-1248
[74] Hertwich E, Pease W & Koshland C. Evaluating the environmental impact of products and production processes: a comparison of six methods [J]. The Science of the Total Environment, 1997, 196: 13-29
[75] Hettige H, Lucas R & Wheeler D. The toxic intensity of industrial production:global patterns, trends, and trade policy [J]. American Economic Review, 1992,82: 478-481
[76] Hettige H, Mani M & Wheeler D. Industrial pollution in economic development:Kuznets revisited [J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2000, 62; 445-476
[77] Hilton F & Levinson A. Factoring the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from automotive lead emissions [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1998, 35: 126-141
[78] Hizen Y & Saijo T. Designing GHG emissions trading institutions in the Kyoto Protocol: an experimental approach [J]. Envirnomental Modelling and Software, 2001,16:533-543
[79] Howarth R, Schipper L & Anderson B. The structure and intensity of energy use: trends in five OECD countries [J]. The Energy Journal, 1993, 14(2): 27-45 http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html,2006
[80] John A & Pecchenino R. An overlapping generations model of growth and the environment [J]. Economics Journal, 1994, 104(427): 1393-1410
[81] -Jotzo F & Michaelowa A. Estimating the CDM market under the Marrakech accords [J]. Climate Policy, 2002, 2: 179-196
[82] Keller W. International technology diffusion [R]. NBER Working Paper No. 8573,2001
[83] Klepper G & Peterson S. Trading hot-air. The influence of permit allocation rules, market power and the US withdrawl from the Kyoto Protocol [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2005, 32: 205-227
[84] Krey M. Transaction costs of unilateral CDM projects in India— results from an empirical survey [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 2385-2397
[85] Krutilla K. Environmental regulation in an open economy [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1991, 20(2): 127-142
[86] Lee H & Roland-Hoist D. International trade and the transfer of environmental costs and benefits. In Francois J & Reinert K eds., Applied Trade Policy Modeling [M], Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994
[87] Levinson A & Taylor M. Trade and the environment: unmasking the pollution haven effect [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 10629, 2004
[88] Lin SJ & Chang TC. Decomposition of SO2 NOx, and CO2 emissions from energy use of major economic sectors in Taiwan [J]. The Energy Journal, 1996,17(1): 1-17
[89] Lopez R. The environment as a factor of production: the effects of economic growth and trade liberalization [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,27: 163-184
[90] Low P & Yeats A. Do "dirty" industries migrate? In Low P ed., International Trade and the Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO. 159, 1992
[91] Lucas R, Wheeler D & Hettige H. Economic development, environmental regulation and the international migration of toxic industrial pollution:1960-1988. In Low P ed., International Trade and Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO. 159,1992
[92] Ludema RD & Wooton I. Cross-border externalities and trade liberalization: the strategic control of pollution [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1994, 27(4):950-966
[93] Mani M & Wheeler D. In search of pollution havens? Dirty industry in the world economy, 1960-1995 [R]. World Bank Working Paper No. 16,1997
[94] Mani M. Environmental tariffs on polluting imports: an empirical study [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 1996, 7: 391-411
[95] Markusen JR. Cooperative control of international pollution and common property resources [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1975b, 89(3): 618-632
[96] Markusen JR. International externalities and optimal tax structures [J]. Journal of International Economics, 1975a, 5(1): 15-29
[97] Massaud A, Schilling M & Hernandez J. Electricity restriction costs [R].Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings, 1994
[98] McGuire M. Regulation, factor rewards, and international trade [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 1982,17(2): 335-354
[99] Michaelowa A & Jotzo F. Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 511-523
[100] Michaelowa A, Stronzik M, Eckermann F, et al. Transaction costs of the Kyoto mechanisms[J]. Climate Policy, 2003, 3: 261-278
[101] Misiolek W & Eleder H. Exclusionary manipulation of markets for pollution rights [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1989,16:156-166
[102] Montero JP. Marketable pollution permits with uncertainty and transaction costs [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 1997,20: 27-50
[103] Munasinghe M & Sanghvi A. Reliability of electricity supply, outage costs and value of service: an overview [J]. Energy Journal, 1988,9: 1-18
[104] OECD. The environmental effect of trade [M]. Paris, OECD, 1994
[105] Office of Technology Assessment. Energy Use and the US Economy [M].Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1990
[106] Office of Technology Assessment. Industrial Energy Efficiency [M]. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1993
[107] Panayotou T. Globalization and environment [R]. Center for International Development, Harvard University, CID Working Paper NO. 53, 2000
[108] Park S, Dissman B & Nam KY. A cross-country decomposition analysis of manufacturing energy consumption [J]. Energy, 1993,18(8): 843-858
[109] Parry IWH. Pollution regulation and the efficiency gains from technological innovation [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1998, 14(3): 229-254
[110] Perroni C & Wigle RM. International trade and environmental quality: how important are the linkages? [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1994, 27(3):551-567
[111] Pethig R. Pollution, welfare, and environmental policy in the theory of comparative advantage [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1976, 2:160-169
[112] Pielke R Jr., Wigley T & Green C. Dangerous assumptions [J]. Nature, 2008,4523: 531-532
[113] Pigou AC. The economics of welfare [M]. London, McMillan, 1920
[114] Quirion P. Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps? [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2005, 27: 343-353
[115] Rauscher M. International trade, factor movements, and the environment [M].Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1997
[116] Rauscher M. National environmental policies and the effects of economic integration [J]. European Journal of Political Economy, 1991, 7: 313-329
[117] Reppelin-Hill V. Trade and environment: an empirical analysis of the technology effect in the steel industry [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1999, 38: 283-301
[118] Revkin AC. A Shift in the Debate Over Global Warming [N]. New York Times,2008-04-06
[119] Robison DH. Industrial pollution abatement: the impact on balance of trade [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1988, 21: 702-706
[120] Rohdin P & Thollander P. Barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in the non-energy intensive manufacturing industry in Sweden [J]. Energy, 2006,31(12): 1836-1844
[121] Ropke I. Trade, development and sustainability: a critical assessment of the free trade dogma [J]. Ecological Economics, 1994,9: 13-22
[122] Runge C. Economic trade and environmental protection. In Braden J, Folmer H & Ulen T eds., Environmental Policy with Economic and Political Integration: the European Community and the United States [M]. Edward Elgar Press, 1993
[123] Sachs JD. Keys to climate protection [J] Scientific American,2008, 298(4): 40
[124] Sager J. An analysis with the CERT model of the FSU market power in the carbon emissions trading market [J]. Environmental Modeling and Assessment,2003, 8: 219-238
[125] Samuelson PA. The transfer problem and transport costs II: analysis of the effects of trade impediments [J]. Economic Journal, 1954, 64: 264-289
[126] Savins R. Transaction costs and tradable permits [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1995,29: 133-148
[127] Schipper L, Murtishaw S, Khrushch M, et al. Carbon emissions from manufacturing energy use in 13 IEA countries: long trends through 1995 [J].Energy Policy, 2001, 29(9): 667-688
[128] Schipper L, Ting M, Khrushch M, et al. The evolution of carbon dioxide emissions from energy use in industrialized countries: an end-use analysis [J].Energy Policy, 1997, 25(7-9): 651-672
[129] Selden T & Song Daqing. Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution? [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,27(2): 147-162
[130] Selden TM, Forest AS & Lockhart JE. Analyzing the reductions in US air pollution emissions: 1970 to 1990 [J]. Land Economics, 1999, 75:1-21
[131] Shiell L. Equity and efficiency in intenational markets for pollution permits [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2003,46: 38-51
[132] Siebert H, Eichberger J, Gronych R, et al. Trade and the environment: a theoretical enquiry [M]. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 1980
[133] Siebert H. Environmental quality and the gains from trade [J]. Kyklos, 1977,30(4): 657-673
[134] Springer U & Varilek M. Estimating the price of tradable permits for greenhouse gas emissions in 2008-12 [J]. Energy Policy, 2004, 32: 611-621
[135] Sullivan M, Vardell T & Johnson M. Power interruption costs to industrial and commercial consumers of electricity [R]. Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference, IEEE, 1996
[136] Tang G & Croix S. Energy consumption and economic activity in China [J].Energy, 1993,14(4): 21-37
[137] The World Bank. Clean Development Mechanism in China: taking a proactive and sustainable approach [R]. The World Bank, 2004
[138] Tobey J. The effects of domestic environmental policies on patterns of world trade: an empirical test [J]. Kyklos, 1990,43(20): 191-209
[139] Torvanger A. Manufacturing sector carbon dioxide emissions in nine OECD countries, 1973-1987: a divisia index decomposition to changes in fuel mix,emissions coefficients, industry structure, energy intensities, and international structure [J]. Energy Economics, 1991,13(3): 168-186
[140] Ulph A. Environmental policy and international trade when governments and producers act strategically [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1996, 30: 256-281
[141] van der Zwaan BCC, Gerlagh R, Klaassen G, et al. Endogenous technological change in climate change modeling [J]. Energy Economics, 2002, 24: 1-19
[142] van Ggteren H & Weber M. Marketable permits, market power, and cheating [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1996, 30: 161-173
[143] Vartia YO. Relative changes and economic indices [D]. Licentiate Thesis, Department of Statistics,University of Helsinki,1974
[144]Vatn A.Input versus emission taxes:environmental taxes in a mass balance and transaction costs perspective[J].Land Eeconomics,1998,74(4):514-525
[145]Wagner J.Causal effects of exports on firm size and productivity:first evidence from a matching approach[J].Economics Letters,2002,77:287-292
[146]Weber D.Pollution permits:a discussion of fundamentals[J].Journal of Economic Education,2002,Summer:277-290
[147]Wheeler D & Martin P.Prices,policies and the international diffusion of clean technology:the case of wood pulp production.In Low P ed.,International Trade and the Environment[R].World Bank Discussion Paper NO.159,1992
[148]Wheeler D.Racing to the bottom? Foreign investment and air pollution in developing countries[J].Journal of Environment and Development,2001,10:225-245
[149]Winters L.Trade liberalization and economic performance:an overview[J].Economic Journal,2004,114:F4-F21
[150]Woerdman E.Emissions trading and transaction costs:analyzing the flaws in the discussion[J].Ecological Economics,2001,38:293-304
[151]Woerdman E.Implementing the Kyoto Protocol:why JI and CDM show more promise than intenational emission trading[J].Energy Policy,2000,28:29-38
[152]Xu B.Multinational enterprises,technology diffusion,and host country productivity growth[J].Journal of Development Economics,2000,62:477-493
[153]Yang HY.Trade liberalization and pollution:a general equilibrium analysis of carbon dioxide emissions in Taiwan[J].Economic Modelling,2001,18:435-454
[154]Zhao JH.Trade and environmental distortions:coordinated intervention[J].Environment and Development Economics,2000,5:361-375
[155]曹凤中、周国梅.对中国环境污染损失估算的评估与建议[J].环境科学与技术,2001,(4):1-4
[156]查冬兰、周德群.我国工业CO2排放影响因素差异性研究——基于高耗能行业与中低耗能行业[J].财贸研究,2008,(1):13-19
[157]陈磊、张世秋.排污权交易中企业行为的微观博弈分析[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2005,41(6):926-934
[158]樊纲、王小鲁、朱恒鹏.中国市场化指数——各省区市场化相对进程2006年度报告(2001、2002、2003、2004、2005指数)[R].中国经济改革研究基金会国民经济研究所工作论文003,2007
[159]方品贤、江欣、奚元福.环境统计手册[M].重庆:四川科学技术出版社,1985
[160]方巍.环境价值论[D].博士学位论文,复旦大学博士学位论文,2004
[161]方希桦、包群、赖明勇.国际技术溢出:基于进口传导机制的实证研究[J].中国软科学,2004,(7):58-64
[162]封进.国际贸易中的环境成本及其对比较优势的影响[J].国际贸易问题,1998,(9):36-39
[163]冯茹.我国钢铁类产品贸易的环境代价研究[D].硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2007
[164]付京燕.环境规制对贸易模式的影响及其政策协调[D].博士学位论文,暨南大学,2006
[165]过孝民、张慧勤.公元2000年中国环境预测与对策研究[J].北京:清华大学出版社,1990
[166]赖明勇、张新、彭水军等.经济增长的源泉:人力资本、研究开发与技术外溢[J].中国社会科学,2005,(2):32-46
[167]兰天.贸易与跨国界环境污染[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2004
[168]李宏.环境经济损失评估方法体系研究[D].硕士学位论文,重庆大学,2001
[169]李坤望、孙玮.我国能耗和能源密集型产品贸易关系分析[J].当代经济科学,2008,30(3):86-91
[170]李慕菡、王立军.国际贸易对我国环境污染的影响与对策分析[J].对外经贸实务,2008,(2):92-95
[171]李寿德.排污权交易市场秩序的特征、功能与制度安排[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(2):47-59
[172]李晓钟.从比较优势到竞争优势——理论与实证研究[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2004
[173]李秀香、张婷.出口增长对我国环境影响的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2004,(7):9-12
[174]李子奈、叶阿忠.高等计量经济学[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2000
[175]林伯强.提高电价和限电的经济影响[J].经济研究,2006,(5):115-126
[176]刘力.国际贸易的环境效应分析及相关研究综述[J].国际经贸探索,2005,(1):20-23
[177]陆菁.贸易与环境经济分析的实证研究综述[J].浙江社会科学,2006,(3):203-209
[178]陆文聪、郭小钗.农业贸易自由化对我国环境的影响与对策[J].中国农村经济,2002,(1):46-51
[179]罗堃.我国污染密集型工业品贸易的环境效应研究[J].国际贸易问题,2007,(10):96-100
[180]缪东玲、党凤兰.贸易与环境实证研究综述[J].北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2004,3(1):52-57
[181]彭水军、包群、赖明勇.技术外溢与吸收能力:基于开放经济下的内生增长模型分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2005,(8):35-46
[182]彭水军、赖明勇、包群.环境、贸易与经济增长——理论、模型与实证[M].上海:上海三联书店,2006
[183]曲如晓.环境外部性与国际贸易福利效应[J].国际经贸探索,2002,(1):10-14
[184]阮俊华.区域环境污染经济损失评估[D].硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2001
[185]沈明高.成本正常化——推动通胀还是挤压利润?[R].CCER“中国经济观察”第13次报告会,2008
[186]施圣炜、黄桐城.期权机制:排污权交易的一种新尝试[J].生产力研究, 2005,(3):60-62
[187]王军.贸易与环境研究的现状与进展[J].世界经济,2004,(7):1-13
[188]吴敬琏.思考与回应:中国工业化道路的抉择(上)[J].学术月刊,2005,(12):38-45
[189]吴敬琏.思考与回应:中国工业化道路的抉择(下)[J].学术月刊,2006,(1):58-61
[190]夏光、赵毅红.中国环境污染损失的经济计量与研究[J].管理世界,1995,(6):198-205
[191]夏友富.外商投资中国污染密集型产业现状、后果及其对策研究[J].管理世界,1999,(3):109-123
[192]徐瑾、万威武.交易成本与排污权交易体系的设计[J].中国软科学,2002,(7):115-118
[193]徐嵩龄.中国环境破坏的经济损失研究:它的意义、方法、成果及研究建议(上)[J].中国软科学,1997,(11):115-127
[194]徐嵩龄.中国环境破坏的经济损失研究:它的意义、方法、成果及研究建议(下)[J].中国软科学,1997,(12):104-110
[195]翟凡、李善同、冯珊.一个中国经济的可计算一般均衡模型[J].数量经济技术经济研究,1997,(3):38-44
[196]张连众、朱坦、李慕菡等.贸易自由化对我国环境污染的影响分析[J].南开经济研究,2003,(3):3-5
[197]张琴、张志辉.国际贸易与环境——相关假说的述评[J].国际贸易问题,2005,(9):73-76
[198]张小蒂、罗堃.出口贸易的环境代价及化解思路[J].社科成果要报(浙江省社会科学界联合会),2007,(25):1-4
[199]张小蒂、罗堃.构建新型清洁发展机制、促进节能减排的若干建议[J].浙江大学区域经济开放与发展研究中心决策参考,2008,(12):1-3
[200]张小蒂、罗堃.中国高能耗、高污染产业节能减排的可持续性——兼论新型清洁发展机制[J].学术月刊,2008,(11):79-86
[201]张小蒂、罗堃.中国能源密集型产品出口贸易的环境代价[J].学术月刊,2007,(11):67-72(《中国社会科学文摘》转载,2008,(2):26-27)
[202]张小蒂.论市场化与环境保护的兼容性[J].管理世界,2003,(2):138-143
[203]张小蒂.资源节约型经济与利益机制[M].上海:上海三联书店,1993
[204]张幼文.政策引致性扭曲的评估与消除——中国开放型经济体制改革的深化[J].学术月刊,2008,(1):60-69
[205]赵细康.环境保护与产业国际竞争力——理论与实证分析[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003
[206]赵玉焕.贸易自由化对环境的影响[J].国际贸易问题,2003,(5):51-55
[207]郑易生、阎林、钱薏红.90年代中期中国环境污染经济损失估算[J].管理世界,1999,(2):189-197
[208]中华人民共和国国家发展与改革委员会.清洁生产概论[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2000
[209]中华人民共和国国家发展与改革委员会.中国应对气候变化国家方案[R].http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xwfb/t20070604_139486.htm,2007-06-04
[210]中华人民共和国环境保护部(原环境保护局)、中华人民共和国国家统计局.中国绿色国民经济核算研究报告2004(公众版)[R].http://www.mep.gov.cn/xcjy/zwhb/2OO609/t20060907_92529.htm,2006-09-07
[211]中华人民共和国环境保护部科技标准司.工业污染物产生和排放系数手册[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2002
[2] Altamirano-Cabrera JC& Finus M. Permit trading and stability of international climate agreements [J]. Journal of Applied Economics, 2006, Ⅸ(1): 19-47
[3] Anderson K. The standard welfare economics of policies affecting trade and environment. In Anderson K & Blackhurst R eds., The greening of world trade issues [M]. Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press, 1992
[4] Ang BW & Choi KH. Decomposition of aggregate energy and gas emission intensities for industry: a refined Divisia index method [J]. The Energy Journal,1997, 18(3): 59-73
[5] Ang BW & Liu FL. A new energy decomposition method: perfect in decomposition and consistent in aggregation [J]. Energy, 2001, 26(6); 537-546
[6] Ang BW & Pandiyan G Decomposition of energy-induced CO_2 emissions in manufacturing [J]. Energy Economics, 1997, 19:363-374
[7] Ang BW & Zhang FQ. A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy and environmental studies [J]. Energy, 2000, 25:1149-1176
[8] Ang BW. Decomposition methodology in industrial energy demand analysis [J].Energy, 1995,20(11): 1081-1095
[9] Antweiler W, Copeland B & Taylor M. Is free trade good for the environment? [J]. American Economic Review, 2001,91: 877-908
[10] Bandara J & Coxhead I. Can trade liberalization have environmental benefits in developing country agriculture? A Sri Lankan case study [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 1999, 21(3): 349-374
[11] Barrett S. Strategic environmental policy and international trade [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 1994, 54: 325-338
[12] Barron R. Market power and market access in international GHG emissions trading [R]. IEA Information Paper, Paris, IEA, 1999
[13] Baumol WJ & Oates WE. The theory of environmental policy [M]. London,Cambridge University Press, 1988
[14] Baumol WJ. Environmental protection, international spillovers and trade [M].Stockholm, Almqvist & Wiksell, 1971
[15] Beghin J & Portier M. Effects of trade liberalization on the environment in the manufacturing sector [J]. World Economy, 1997, 20: 435-456
[16] Benarroch M & Thille H. Transboundary pollution and the gains from trade [J].Journal of International Economics, 2001, 55(1): 139-159
[17] Bergstrom TC and Goodman RP. Private demands for public goods [J]. The American Economic Review, 1973, 63(3): 280-296
[18] Bernard A & Jensen JB. Exceptional exporters performance: cause, effect or both? [J]. Journal of International Economics, 1999,47: 1-25
[19] Birdsall N & Wheeler D. Trade policy and industrial pollution in Latin America: where are the pollution havens? [J]. Journal of Environment and Development,1993, 2: 137-149
[20] Bohm P. International greenhouse gas emission trading— with special refrence to the Kyoto Protocol.In Carraro C ed., Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy [M]. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000
[21] Bohringer C & Loschel A. Market power in international emission trading—the impacts of US withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol [R]. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) Discussion Paper No.01-58,2001
[22] Bruvoll A & Medin H. Factoring the environmental Kuznets curve— evidence from Norway [R]. Statistics Norway Discussion Paper No. 275, 2000
[23] Bruvoll A & Medin H. Factors behind the environmental Kuznets curve— a decomposition of the changes in air pollution [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2003, 24: 27-48
[24] Buonanno P, Carraro C & Galeotti M. Endogenous induced technical change and the costs of Kyoto [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2003, 25: 11 -34
[25] Buonanno P, Carraro C, Castelnuovo E, et al. Emission trading restrictions with endogenous technological change [J]. International Environmental Agreements:Politics, Law and Economics, 2001,1: 379-395
[26] Carraro C & Galeotti M. Does endogenous technical change make a difference in climate change policy analysis? A robustness exercise with the FEEM-RICE Model. In Carraro C ed., Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy [M].Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000
[27] Cason T, Gangadharan L & Duke C. Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria [J]. Ecological Economics, 2003,46: 469-491
[28] Chilchilnisky G North-South trade and the global environment [J]. American Economic Review, 1994, 84: 851-874
[29] Coe D & Helpman E. International R&D spillovers [J]. European Economic Review, 1995,39:859-887
[30] Coe D, Helpman E & Hoffmaister A. North-South R&D spillovers [J]. Economic Journal, 1997,107: 134-150
[31] Cole MA & Elliot RJR. Determining the trade-environment composition effect: the role of capital, labor and environmental regulations [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2003,46: 363-383
[32] Cole MA, Rayner AJ & Bates. Trade liberalisation and the environment: the case of the Uruguay round [J]. World Economy, 1998, 21(3): 337-347
[33] Cole MA. Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages [J]. Ecological Economics, 2004,48: 71-81
[34] Conrad K. Taxes and subsidies for pollution-intensive industries and trade policy [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1993, 25:121-135
[35] Copeland B & Taylor M. A simple model of trade, capital mobility and the environment [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 5898, 1997
[36] Copeland B & Taylor M. North-South trade and the environment [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1994,109: 755-787
[37] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade and the environment: a partial synthesis [J].American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1995a, 77: 765-771
[38] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade and transboundary pollution [J]. American Economic Review, 1995b, 85(4): 716-737
[39] Copeland B & Taylor M. Trade, growth and the environment [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004,42(1): 7-71
[40] Criqui P, Mima S, Viguier L. Marginal abatement costs of CO_2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the POLES model [J]. Energy Policy, 1999, 27: 585-601
[41] Daly H & Goodland R. An ecological assessment of deregulation of international commerce under GATT [J]. Ecological Economics, 1994,9: 73-92
[42] Dean JM. Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test [J].Canadian Journal of Economics, 2002, 35(4): 819-842
[43] Dean JM. Trade and environment: a survey of the Literature. In Low P ed.,International Trade and the Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO.159, 1992
[44] Dessus S & Bussolo M. Is there a trade-off between trade liberalization and pollution abatement? A computable general equilibrium assessment applied to Costa Rica [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 1998, 20(1): 11-31
[45] Doblin C. Declining energy intensity in the US manufacturing sector [J]. The Energy Journal, 1988,9(2): 109-135
[46] Dornbusch R, Fischer S, Samuelson PA. Comparative advantage, trade and payments in a Ricardian model with a continuum of goods [J]. American Economic Review, 1977, LX VII: 823-839
[47] Dua A & Esty D. Sustaining the Asia Pacific miracle [M]. Washington DC,Institute for International Economics, 1997
[48] Ebert U. Environmental goods and the distribution of income [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 2003, 25(4): 435-459
[49] Ederington J & Minier J. Is environmental policy a secondary trade barrier? An empirical analysis [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 2003, 36: 137-154
[50] Eliste P & Fredriksson P. Does open trade result in a race to the bottom?Cross-country evidence [C]. World Bank Conference on Trade, Global Policy and the Environment, Washington DC, 1998
[51] Ellerman AD & Decaux A. Analysis of post-Kyoto CO_2 emissions trading using marginal abatement curves [R]. MIT Joint Programme on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No.40,1998
[52] Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). National Air Pollution Emissions Estimates, 1940- 1990 [M]. Washington DC: EPA-450/4-91-026,1991
[53] Esty D & Geradin D. Market access, competitiveness, and harmonization:environmental protection in regional trade agreements [J]. The Harvard Environmental Law Review, 1997,21: 265-336
[54] European Commission. Competitiveness of and access to cost-effective energy inputs for energy intensive industries [R]. High Level Group on Competitiveness, Energy and Environment, 2006
[55] Falvey R, Foster N & Greenaway D. North-South trade, knowledge spillovers and growth [J]. Journal of Economic Integration, 2002, 17: 650-670
[56] Falvey R, Foster N, & Greenaway D. Imports, exports, knowledge spillovers and growth [J]. Economics Letters, 2004, 85: 209-213
[57] Fichtner W, Graehl S & Rentz O. The impacts of private investor's transaction costs on the cost effectiveness of project-bases Kyoto mechanisms [J]. Climate Policy, 2003, 3: 249-259
[58] Fischer C. Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: balancing trade-offs with baselines [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 1807-1823
[59] Funk M. Trade and international R&D spillovers among OECD countries [J]. Southern Economic Journal, 2001, 67: 725-737
[60] Ganadharan L. Transaction costs in pollution markets: an empirical study [J].Land Economics, 2000, 76(4): 601-614
[61] Girma S, Greenaway D & Kneller R. Export market exit and performance dynamics [J]. Economics Letters, 2003, 80: 181-187
[62] Glasson J, Therivel R & Chadwick A. Introduction to environmental impact assessment [M]. Taylor & Francis, 2005
[63] Godby R. Market power and emission trading: theory and laboratory results [J].Pacific Economic Review, 2000,5(3): 349-363
[64] Godby R. Market power in laboratory emission permit markets [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 2002, 23: 279-318
[65] Greening L, Davis B & Schipper L. Decomposition of aggregate carbon intensity for the manufacturing sector: comparison of declining trends from ten OECD countries for the period 1971 to 1991 [J]. Energy Economics, 1998,20(1): 43-65
[66] Greening L, Davis W, Schipper L, et al. Comparisons of six decomposition methods: application to aggregate energy intensity for manufacturing in ten OECD countries [J]. Energy Economics, 1997, 19(3): 375-390
[67] Greening L. Effects of human behavior on aggregate carbon intensity of personal transportation: comparison of the OECD countries for the period 1970 to 1993 [J]. Energy Economics, 2004, 26(1) 1-30
[68] Grossman G & Krueger A. Environmental impacts of a North America Free Trade Agreement [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 3914,1991
[69] Grossman G & Krueger A. Environmental impacts of a North America Free Trade Agreement. In Garber P ed., The US-Mexico Free Trade Agreement [M].Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 1993
[70] Graver G. Optimal investment in pollution control capital in a neoclassical growth context [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1976, 3(3): 165-177
[71] Hahn R. Market power and transferable property rights [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1984, November: 753-765
[72] Hamwey R & Baranzini A. Sizing the global GHG offset market [J]. Eergy Policy, 1999,27: 123-127
[73] Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons [J]. Science, 1968,162(13): 1243-1248
[74] Hertwich E, Pease W & Koshland C. Evaluating the environmental impact of products and production processes: a comparison of six methods [J]. The Science of the Total Environment, 1997, 196: 13-29
[75] Hettige H, Lucas R & Wheeler D. The toxic intensity of industrial production:global patterns, trends, and trade policy [J]. American Economic Review, 1992,82: 478-481
[76] Hettige H, Mani M & Wheeler D. Industrial pollution in economic development:Kuznets revisited [J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2000, 62; 445-476
[77] Hilton F & Levinson A. Factoring the environmental Kuznets curve: evidence from automotive lead emissions [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1998, 35: 126-141
[78] Hizen Y & Saijo T. Designing GHG emissions trading institutions in the Kyoto Protocol: an experimental approach [J]. Envirnomental Modelling and Software, 2001,16:533-543
[79] Howarth R, Schipper L & Anderson B. The structure and intensity of energy use: trends in five OECD countries [J]. The Energy Journal, 1993, 14(2): 27-45 http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html,2006
[80] John A & Pecchenino R. An overlapping generations model of growth and the environment [J]. Economics Journal, 1994, 104(427): 1393-1410
[81] -Jotzo F & Michaelowa A. Estimating the CDM market under the Marrakech accords [J]. Climate Policy, 2002, 2: 179-196
[82] Keller W. International technology diffusion [R]. NBER Working Paper No. 8573,2001
[83] Klepper G & Peterson S. Trading hot-air. The influence of permit allocation rules, market power and the US withdrawl from the Kyoto Protocol [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2005, 32: 205-227
[84] Krey M. Transaction costs of unilateral CDM projects in India— results from an empirical survey [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 2385-2397
[85] Krutilla K. Environmental regulation in an open economy [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1991, 20(2): 127-142
[86] Lee H & Roland-Hoist D. International trade and the transfer of environmental costs and benefits. In Francois J & Reinert K eds., Applied Trade Policy Modeling [M], Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994
[87] Levinson A & Taylor M. Trade and the environment: unmasking the pollution haven effect [R]. NBER Working Paper NO. 10629, 2004
[88] Lin SJ & Chang TC. Decomposition of SO2 NOx, and CO2 emissions from energy use of major economic sectors in Taiwan [J]. The Energy Journal, 1996,17(1): 1-17
[89] Lopez R. The environment as a factor of production: the effects of economic growth and trade liberalization [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,27: 163-184
[90] Low P & Yeats A. Do "dirty" industries migrate? In Low P ed., International Trade and the Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO. 159, 1992
[91] Lucas R, Wheeler D & Hettige H. Economic development, environmental regulation and the international migration of toxic industrial pollution:1960-1988. In Low P ed., International Trade and Environment [R]. World Bank Discussion Paper NO. 159,1992
[92] Ludema RD & Wooton I. Cross-border externalities and trade liberalization: the strategic control of pollution [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1994, 27(4):950-966
[93] Mani M & Wheeler D. In search of pollution havens? Dirty industry in the world economy, 1960-1995 [R]. World Bank Working Paper No. 16,1997
[94] Mani M. Environmental tariffs on polluting imports: an empirical study [J].Environmental and Resource Economics, 1996, 7: 391-411
[95] Markusen JR. Cooperative control of international pollution and common property resources [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1975b, 89(3): 618-632
[96] Markusen JR. International externalities and optimal tax structures [J]. Journal of International Economics, 1975a, 5(1): 15-29
[97] Massaud A, Schilling M & Hernandez J. Electricity restriction costs [R].Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings, 1994
[98] McGuire M. Regulation, factor rewards, and international trade [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 1982,17(2): 335-354
[99] Michaelowa A & Jotzo F. Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism [J]. Energy Policy, 2005, 33: 511-523
[100] Michaelowa A, Stronzik M, Eckermann F, et al. Transaction costs of the Kyoto mechanisms[J]. Climate Policy, 2003, 3: 261-278
[101] Misiolek W & Eleder H. Exclusionary manipulation of markets for pollution rights [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1989,16:156-166
[102] Montero JP. Marketable pollution permits with uncertainty and transaction costs [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 1997,20: 27-50
[103] Munasinghe M & Sanghvi A. Reliability of electricity supply, outage costs and value of service: an overview [J]. Energy Journal, 1988,9: 1-18
[104] OECD. The environmental effect of trade [M]. Paris, OECD, 1994
[105] Office of Technology Assessment. Energy Use and the US Economy [M].Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1990
[106] Office of Technology Assessment. Industrial Energy Efficiency [M]. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1993
[107] Panayotou T. Globalization and environment [R]. Center for International Development, Harvard University, CID Working Paper NO. 53, 2000
[108] Park S, Dissman B & Nam KY. A cross-country decomposition analysis of manufacturing energy consumption [J]. Energy, 1993,18(8): 843-858
[109] Parry IWH. Pollution regulation and the efficiency gains from technological innovation [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1998, 14(3): 229-254
[110] Perroni C & Wigle RM. International trade and environmental quality: how important are the linkages? [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1994, 27(3):551-567
[111] Pethig R. Pollution, welfare, and environmental policy in the theory of comparative advantage [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1976, 2:160-169
[112] Pielke R Jr., Wigley T & Green C. Dangerous assumptions [J]. Nature, 2008,4523: 531-532
[113] Pigou AC. The economics of welfare [M]. London, McMillan, 1920
[114] Quirion P. Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps? [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2005, 27: 343-353
[115] Rauscher M. International trade, factor movements, and the environment [M].Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1997
[116] Rauscher M. National environmental policies and the effects of economic integration [J]. European Journal of Political Economy, 1991, 7: 313-329
[117] Reppelin-Hill V. Trade and environment: an empirical analysis of the technology effect in the steel industry [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1999, 38: 283-301
[118] Revkin AC. A Shift in the Debate Over Global Warming [N]. New York Times,2008-04-06
[119] Robison DH. Industrial pollution abatement: the impact on balance of trade [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics, 1988, 21: 702-706
[120] Rohdin P & Thollander P. Barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in the non-energy intensive manufacturing industry in Sweden [J]. Energy, 2006,31(12): 1836-1844
[121] Ropke I. Trade, development and sustainability: a critical assessment of the free trade dogma [J]. Ecological Economics, 1994,9: 13-22
[122] Runge C. Economic trade and environmental protection. In Braden J, Folmer H & Ulen T eds., Environmental Policy with Economic and Political Integration: the European Community and the United States [M]. Edward Elgar Press, 1993
[123] Sachs JD. Keys to climate protection [J] Scientific American,2008, 298(4): 40
[124] Sager J. An analysis with the CERT model of the FSU market power in the carbon emissions trading market [J]. Environmental Modeling and Assessment,2003, 8: 219-238
[125] Samuelson PA. The transfer problem and transport costs II: analysis of the effects of trade impediments [J]. Economic Journal, 1954, 64: 264-289
[126] Savins R. Transaction costs and tradable permits [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1995,29: 133-148
[127] Schipper L, Murtishaw S, Khrushch M, et al. Carbon emissions from manufacturing energy use in 13 IEA countries: long trends through 1995 [J].Energy Policy, 2001, 29(9): 667-688
[128] Schipper L, Ting M, Khrushch M, et al. The evolution of carbon dioxide emissions from energy use in industrialized countries: an end-use analysis [J].Energy Policy, 1997, 25(7-9): 651-672
[129] Selden T & Song Daqing. Environmental quality and development: is there a Kuznets curve for air pollution? [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994,27(2): 147-162
[130] Selden TM, Forest AS & Lockhart JE. Analyzing the reductions in US air pollution emissions: 1970 to 1990 [J]. Land Economics, 1999, 75:1-21
[131] Shiell L. Equity and efficiency in intenational markets for pollution permits [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2003,46: 38-51
[132] Siebert H, Eichberger J, Gronych R, et al. Trade and the environment: a theoretical enquiry [M]. Amsterdam, Elsevier, 1980
[133] Siebert H. Environmental quality and the gains from trade [J]. Kyklos, 1977,30(4): 657-673
[134] Springer U & Varilek M. Estimating the price of tradable permits for greenhouse gas emissions in 2008-12 [J]. Energy Policy, 2004, 32: 611-621
[135] Sullivan M, Vardell T & Johnson M. Power interruption costs to industrial and commercial consumers of electricity [R]. Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference, IEEE, 1996
[136] Tang G & Croix S. Energy consumption and economic activity in China [J].Energy, 1993,14(4): 21-37
[137] The World Bank. Clean Development Mechanism in China: taking a proactive and sustainable approach [R]. The World Bank, 2004
[138] Tobey J. The effects of domestic environmental policies on patterns of world trade: an empirical test [J]. Kyklos, 1990,43(20): 191-209
[139] Torvanger A. Manufacturing sector carbon dioxide emissions in nine OECD countries, 1973-1987: a divisia index decomposition to changes in fuel mix,emissions coefficients, industry structure, energy intensities, and international structure [J]. Energy Economics, 1991,13(3): 168-186
[140] Ulph A. Environmental policy and international trade when governments and producers act strategically [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1996, 30: 256-281
[141] van der Zwaan BCC, Gerlagh R, Klaassen G, et al. Endogenous technological change in climate change modeling [J]. Energy Economics, 2002, 24: 1-19
[142] van Ggteren H & Weber M. Marketable permits, market power, and cheating [J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1996, 30: 161-173
[143] Vartia YO. Relative changes and economic indices [D]. Licentiate Thesis, Department of Statistics,University of Helsinki,1974
[144]Vatn A.Input versus emission taxes:environmental taxes in a mass balance and transaction costs perspective[J].Land Eeconomics,1998,74(4):514-525
[145]Wagner J.Causal effects of exports on firm size and productivity:first evidence from a matching approach[J].Economics Letters,2002,77:287-292
[146]Weber D.Pollution permits:a discussion of fundamentals[J].Journal of Economic Education,2002,Summer:277-290
[147]Wheeler D & Martin P.Prices,policies and the international diffusion of clean technology:the case of wood pulp production.In Low P ed.,International Trade and the Environment[R].World Bank Discussion Paper NO.159,1992
[148]Wheeler D.Racing to the bottom? Foreign investment and air pollution in developing countries[J].Journal of Environment and Development,2001,10:225-245
[149]Winters L.Trade liberalization and economic performance:an overview[J].Economic Journal,2004,114:F4-F21
[150]Woerdman E.Emissions trading and transaction costs:analyzing the flaws in the discussion[J].Ecological Economics,2001,38:293-304
[151]Woerdman E.Implementing the Kyoto Protocol:why JI and CDM show more promise than intenational emission trading[J].Energy Policy,2000,28:29-38
[152]Xu B.Multinational enterprises,technology diffusion,and host country productivity growth[J].Journal of Development Economics,2000,62:477-493
[153]Yang HY.Trade liberalization and pollution:a general equilibrium analysis of carbon dioxide emissions in Taiwan[J].Economic Modelling,2001,18:435-454
[154]Zhao JH.Trade and environmental distortions:coordinated intervention[J].Environment and Development Economics,2000,5:361-375
[155]曹凤中、周国梅.对中国环境污染损失估算的评估与建议[J].环境科学与技术,2001,(4):1-4
[156]查冬兰、周德群.我国工业CO2排放影响因素差异性研究——基于高耗能行业与中低耗能行业[J].财贸研究,2008,(1):13-19
[157]陈磊、张世秋.排污权交易中企业行为的微观博弈分析[J].北京大学学报(自然科学版),2005,41(6):926-934
[158]樊纲、王小鲁、朱恒鹏.中国市场化指数——各省区市场化相对进程2006年度报告(2001、2002、2003、2004、2005指数)[R].中国经济改革研究基金会国民经济研究所工作论文003,2007
[159]方品贤、江欣、奚元福.环境统计手册[M].重庆:四川科学技术出版社,1985
[160]方巍.环境价值论[D].博士学位论文,复旦大学博士学位论文,2004
[161]方希桦、包群、赖明勇.国际技术溢出:基于进口传导机制的实证研究[J].中国软科学,2004,(7):58-64
[162]封进.国际贸易中的环境成本及其对比较优势的影响[J].国际贸易问题,1998,(9):36-39
[163]冯茹.我国钢铁类产品贸易的环境代价研究[D].硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2007
[164]付京燕.环境规制对贸易模式的影响及其政策协调[D].博士学位论文,暨南大学,2006
[165]过孝民、张慧勤.公元2000年中国环境预测与对策研究[J].北京:清华大学出版社,1990
[166]赖明勇、张新、彭水军等.经济增长的源泉:人力资本、研究开发与技术外溢[J].中国社会科学,2005,(2):32-46
[167]兰天.贸易与跨国界环境污染[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2004
[168]李宏.环境经济损失评估方法体系研究[D].硕士学位论文,重庆大学,2001
[169]李坤望、孙玮.我国能耗和能源密集型产品贸易关系分析[J].当代经济科学,2008,30(3):86-91
[170]李慕菡、王立军.国际贸易对我国环境污染的影响与对策分析[J].对外经贸实务,2008,(2):92-95
[171]李寿德.排污权交易市场秩序的特征、功能与制度安排[J].上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(2):47-59
[172]李晓钟.从比较优势到竞争优势——理论与实证研究[M].杭州:浙江大学出版社,2004
[173]李秀香、张婷.出口增长对我国环境影响的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2004,(7):9-12
[174]李子奈、叶阿忠.高等计量经济学[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2000
[175]林伯强.提高电价和限电的经济影响[J].经济研究,2006,(5):115-126
[176]刘力.国际贸易的环境效应分析及相关研究综述[J].国际经贸探索,2005,(1):20-23
[177]陆菁.贸易与环境经济分析的实证研究综述[J].浙江社会科学,2006,(3):203-209
[178]陆文聪、郭小钗.农业贸易自由化对我国环境的影响与对策[J].中国农村经济,2002,(1):46-51
[179]罗堃.我国污染密集型工业品贸易的环境效应研究[J].国际贸易问题,2007,(10):96-100
[180]缪东玲、党凤兰.贸易与环境实证研究综述[J].北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2004,3(1):52-57
[181]彭水军、包群、赖明勇.技术外溢与吸收能力:基于开放经济下的内生增长模型分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2005,(8):35-46
[182]彭水军、赖明勇、包群.环境、贸易与经济增长——理论、模型与实证[M].上海:上海三联书店,2006
[183]曲如晓.环境外部性与国际贸易福利效应[J].国际经贸探索,2002,(1):10-14
[184]阮俊华.区域环境污染经济损失评估[D].硕士学位论文,浙江大学,2001
[185]沈明高.成本正常化——推动通胀还是挤压利润?[R].CCER“中国经济观察”第13次报告会,2008
[186]施圣炜、黄桐城.期权机制:排污权交易的一种新尝试[J].生产力研究, 2005,(3):60-62
[187]王军.贸易与环境研究的现状与进展[J].世界经济,2004,(7):1-13
[188]吴敬琏.思考与回应:中国工业化道路的抉择(上)[J].学术月刊,2005,(12):38-45
[189]吴敬琏.思考与回应:中国工业化道路的抉择(下)[J].学术月刊,2006,(1):58-61
[190]夏光、赵毅红.中国环境污染损失的经济计量与研究[J].管理世界,1995,(6):198-205
[191]夏友富.外商投资中国污染密集型产业现状、后果及其对策研究[J].管理世界,1999,(3):109-123
[192]徐瑾、万威武.交易成本与排污权交易体系的设计[J].中国软科学,2002,(7):115-118
[193]徐嵩龄.中国环境破坏的经济损失研究:它的意义、方法、成果及研究建议(上)[J].中国软科学,1997,(11):115-127
[194]徐嵩龄.中国环境破坏的经济损失研究:它的意义、方法、成果及研究建议(下)[J].中国软科学,1997,(12):104-110
[195]翟凡、李善同、冯珊.一个中国经济的可计算一般均衡模型[J].数量经济技术经济研究,1997,(3):38-44
[196]张连众、朱坦、李慕菡等.贸易自由化对我国环境污染的影响分析[J].南开经济研究,2003,(3):3-5
[197]张琴、张志辉.国际贸易与环境——相关假说的述评[J].国际贸易问题,2005,(9):73-76
[198]张小蒂、罗堃.出口贸易的环境代价及化解思路[J].社科成果要报(浙江省社会科学界联合会),2007,(25):1-4
[199]张小蒂、罗堃.构建新型清洁发展机制、促进节能减排的若干建议[J].浙江大学区域经济开放与发展研究中心决策参考,2008,(12):1-3
[200]张小蒂、罗堃.中国高能耗、高污染产业节能减排的可持续性——兼论新型清洁发展机制[J].学术月刊,2008,(11):79-86
[201]张小蒂、罗堃.中国能源密集型产品出口贸易的环境代价[J].学术月刊,2007,(11):67-72(《中国社会科学文摘》转载,2008,(2):26-27)
[202]张小蒂.论市场化与环境保护的兼容性[J].管理世界,2003,(2):138-143
[203]张小蒂.资源节约型经济与利益机制[M].上海:上海三联书店,1993
[204]张幼文.政策引致性扭曲的评估与消除——中国开放型经济体制改革的深化[J].学术月刊,2008,(1):60-69
[205]赵细康.环境保护与产业国际竞争力——理论与实证分析[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003
[206]赵玉焕.贸易自由化对环境的影响[J].国际贸易问题,2003,(5):51-55
[207]郑易生、阎林、钱薏红.90年代中期中国环境污染经济损失估算[J].管理世界,1999,(2):189-197
[208]中华人民共和国国家发展与改革委员会.清洁生产概论[M].北京:中国检察出版社,2000
[209]中华人民共和国国家发展与改革委员会.中国应对气候变化国家方案[R].http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/xwfb/t20070604_139486.htm,2007-06-04
[210]中华人民共和国环境保护部(原环境保护局)、中华人民共和国国家统计局.中国绿色国民经济核算研究报告2004(公众版)[R].http://www.mep.gov.cn/xcjy/zwhb/2OO609/t20060907_92529.htm,2006-09-07
[211]中华人民共和国环境保护部科技标准司.工业污染物产生和排放系数手册[M].北京:中国环境科学出版社,2002