Micro Lenders

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Monday, 9 April 2012

EuroNasty II: Carbon Taxes on Maritime Transport?

Posted on 02:26 by Unknown
[NOTE: Out of curiosity, I Googled "euronasty" and was shocked, just shocked at the search results! As I've said before, the IPE Zone is a family-oriented site.] There has already been much controversy over the European Union beginning to levy carbon taxes on air transport. In particular, their application to foreign carriers makes them complain that the EU regulation constitutes extraterritoriality insofar as (1) obviously, they aren't European carriers and (2) "taxable" miles are those incurred not just within EU airspace but for the entire journey. So far the EU has avoided contestation of the legality of these carbon taxes--probably because there is no discrimination between EU-based and foreign carriers.

That said, these carbon taxes are tremendously unpopular, especially among the Americans and the Chinese. The latter have supposedly even told their airlines not to buy from Airbus to "punish" the EU. They've even been instructed not to pay these taxes. Well, well, well: guess what? Other developing countries are also up in arms against the EU's levies. What's more, it seems the EU authorities aren't nearly quite done losing friends and offending people. In a recent newsletter sent to me by the South Centre, the Europeans appear keen on extending these taxes to shipborne transport, which would obviously affect a lot more merchandise trade if passed:
On 21 February 2012, the EU Council of economic and finance ministers adopted conclusions that included one on aviation and maritime carbon taxes. The Council of Ministers reiterates that "the carbon pricing of global aviation and maritime transportation would generate the necessary price signal to efficiently achieve more emission reductions from these sectors and that carbon pricing of global aviation and maritime transportation have as well the potential to generate large financial flows."

The Council invites "the (European) Commission to prepare a reflection paper by June (2012) on carbon pricing of global aviation and maritime transportation taking into account the developments in IMO (International Maritime Organisation) and ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) and previous work by AGF (UN Secretary-General's High Level Panel on Climate Change Financing) and by the World Bank and other international organisations for the G20." It also stressed "the need of taking into account national budgetary rules and the principles and provisions of the UNFCCC (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) in the use of potential revenue". 
As before, China is at the forefront of countries sounding the alarm. Lest you think that American hypocrisy is all we talk about here in the IPE Zone, what we have now is a clear case of Chinese hypocrisy. When it comes to the infamous maritime territorial disputes with its neighbours concerning the South China Sea, the PRC staunchly refuses to "multilateralize" the issue where multilateral fora can help negate its overwhelming power over Southeast Asian nations. However, when it comes to carbon emissions, China is now calling for the EU to, ahem, "multilateralize" this issue to rein in European power which it believes the EU is wielding unilaterally.

Perhaps the Chinese don't perceive their own inconsistencies, but here's what it's worth in the environmental domain. Aside from not bringing up maritime carbon taxes in appropriate multilateral fora, we return to the complaint about the blanket application of such taxes going against the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities for LDCs which still need to develop and have less technical capacity for climate mitigation. Remember too that China--the world's largest merchandise exporter--has the EU for its largest trading partner. Hence, the sheer amount of trade these taxes would affect given that most Chinese goods come to the Occident by sea is...substantial:
Though the EU Council has called for a "reflection paper" at this stage, there were already critical reactions to this move in China, which is one of the vocal opponents to the manner in which such mandatory taxes are determined even though there is a need to address greenhouse gases emissions in these sectors. Objections centre on the unilateral and mandatory nature of the EU action even while discussions continue in the IMO and ICAO, the two global organisations responsible for such issues.

Critics also raise the issue of common but differentiated responsibilities that underpin the UNFCCC, arguing that since climate change is the result of the accumulated greenhouse gases emissions of developed countries over the past two centuries, it is not equitable to impose the same level of burden on developing and developed countries (in this case the payment of carbon taxes in the aviation and maritime sectors). 
I generally understand what the Europeans are trying to achieve. By leading a movement to applying carbon taxes, the EU hopes to ratchet up environmental regulation worldwide. I call it seeking the California-effect globally. In the US, the strictest emissions and safety regulations emanate from California, and car manufacturers just make all their vehicles meet California standards rather than make different models for one state and all the rest. However, there are indeed questions of fairness that China brings up which are legitimate alike extraterritoriality and CBD.

Again, the honest truth is that Mother Nature could care less about artificial distinctions humans make between developed and developing nations. That is, carbon emissions are a shared externality to economic activity.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in China, Development, Environment, Europe, Trade | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Today's Resource Curse on Aussie Surfboard Mfg
    Little surfer, little one, make my heart come all undone...with your"Made in China" surfboard? Is there nothing sacred about beach...
  • Yay! Our LSE IDEAS, World's 4th Best Uni Thinktank
    Well here's a nice bit of news concerning LSE IDEAS , the research centre I am associated with. The good folks at the University of Penn...
  • Globocop No More: United States After Unipolarity
    LSE IDEAS has been churning out special reports at such a furious pace that I almost forgot to mention this one concerning The United State...
  • Fake Diploma? Be Ecuador's Next CenBank Chief!
    Ah, Ecuador...the archetypal banana republic. For a country that supposedly loathes the United States via its leader Rafael Correa and his a...
  • Egypt and the Elusive Interest-Free IMF Loan
    Back in the 80s, I loved Aldo Nova's one-hit wonder " Fantasy ." Instead of treating it as a catchy tune and nothing more, I...
  • Commercialism & Christmas in Non-Christian Societies
    Thailand features Christmas elephants, f'rinstance Your Asian correspondent--obviously Catholic with a name like "Emmanuel"--h...
  • How Scuderia Ferrari Improved a Hospital ICU [!]
    Longtime readers will know from my blog FAQs that I am most excited about the field of IPE borrowing from different social science discipli...
  • Lamborghini Aventador, US-Subsidized Supercar
    Now for one of my occasional Robb Report impersonations--albeit with an IPE twist. (We've got style, baby.) In 1998, Lamborghini becam...
  • Patrice Lumumba Friendship University Revisited
    Younger readers probably don't know what the USSR's Patrice Lumumba Friendship University was, so a short introduction is required. ...
  • The Myth of the Inflexible Chinese Communist Party
    Some of you may be familiar with the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) that was created by the American congress in 2...

Categories

  • Africa
  • Agriculture
  • Americana
  • Anti-Globalization
  • APEC
  • Bretton Woods Twins
  • Caribbean
  • Casino Capitalism
  • Cheneynomics
  • China
  • Commodities
  • Credit Crisis
  • CSR
  • Culture
  • Currencies
  • Demography
  • Development
  • ds Twins
  • Economic Diplomacy
  • Economic History
  • Education
  • Egypt
  • Energy
  • Entertainment
  • Environment
  • Europe
  • FDI
  • Gender Equality
  • Governance
  • Health
  • Hegemony
  • IMF
  • India
  • Innovation
  • Internet Governance
  • Japan
  • Labor
  • Latin America
  • Litigation
  • Marketing
  • Media
  • Microfinance
  • Middle East
  • Migration
  • Mining
  • MNCs
  • Neoliberalism
  • Nonsense
  • Religion
  • Russia
  • Security
  • Service Announcement
  • Socialism
  • Soft Power
  • South Asia
  • South Korea
  • Southeast Asia
  • Sports
  • Supply Chain
  • Trade
  • Travel
  • Underground Economy
  • United Nations
  • World Bank

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (183)
    • ►  December (15)
    • ►  November (17)
    • ►  October (19)
    • ►  September (21)
    • ►  August (14)
    • ►  July (17)
    • ►  June (16)
    • ►  May (8)
    • ►  April (9)
    • ►  March (13)
    • ►  February (14)
    • ►  January (20)
  • ▼  2012 (242)
    • ►  December (21)
    • ►  November (25)
    • ►  October (15)
    • ►  September (17)
    • ►  August (20)
    • ►  July (16)
    • ►  June (17)
    • ►  May (21)
    • ▼  April (16)
      • Globalizing Bad Taste in Cars, BRICS+Beckham Edn
      • Bad Habits Die Hard: On USAID "Relaxing" Tied Aid
      • 6/365 Egyptian Lawmakers Vote for IMF Rescue
      • Fight-a-Bully: Philippine, PRC Territorial Disputes
      • Why LDCs Won't Give the IMF More Money
      • IMF's (Shocking?) Endorsement of Procyclicality
      • Lingo Wars: Urban Dictionary v Academie Francaise
      • EuroPissants: Should Germany [!] Leave Eurozone?
      • Pope 1, Obama 0: LatAm United vs Cuba Embargo
      • I Knew It: 61% of Treasuries Purchased by the Fed
      • Developmental Authoritarianism: Burma's Turn?
      • EuroNasty II: Carbon Taxes on Maritime Transport?
      • Palace Coup? World Bank Vets Pick Okonjo-Iweala
      • A Parisian in America: Comic Stylings of IMF's Lag...
      • Got Fission? Debating Nukes 4 Development
      • Money Talks? Bahrain GP Still On (Fortnight to Go)
    • ►  March (20)
    • ►  February (26)
    • ►  January (28)
  • ►  2011 (75)
    • ►  December (23)
    • ►  November (21)
    • ►  October (27)
    • ►  September (4)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile