1. Introduction
In November 2020, 15 countries officially signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), covering resource-endowed and technology-endowed countries, which not only boosted confidence in regional trade liberalization and globalization but also contributed to the development of energy markets [
1]. On the one hand, all members of the RCEP have promised to reduce tariffs and standard barriers, which is conducive to further strengthening trade cooperation and solving the problem of energy supply shortage. On the other hand, the economic and energy endowments of the RCEP countries are quite different, forming a certain complementarity of energy and technology, which is conducive to the regional countries playing their respective comparative advantages and strengthening energy trade cooperation. Under the background of the signing of the RCEP, energy trade cooperation between relevant countries and regions, as an important part of regional economic and trade integration, will continue to play a major role in international trade. In addition, the particularity of the distribution of energy resources in the Asia-Pacific region gives the sub-regional energy trade great cooperation advantages [
2], which plays an important role in promoting RCEP energy trade cooperation. At present, countries in the region have a high degree of dependence on foreign energy, especially fossil energy, which in many countries is heavily dependent on imports. According to the
BP World Energy Statistics Yearbook 2024, abundant resources make ASEAN and Australia important energy exporters. For example, Australia has long exported coal and natural gas to China. In addition, according to UNCTAD statistics, bilateral energy trade between RCEP countries is frequent. More than 50% of energy trade in most countries comes from the RCEP region. In particular, 96% of New Zealand’s trade volume in 2023 came from countries in the RCEP region. Obviously, the trade cooperation between RCEP countries has a certain realistic basis.
In addition, whether it is a change in the global energy landscape or the introduction of carbon neutrality goals, there is an urgent need to strengthen regional energy trade. At the same time, promoting energy trade cooperation also requires an accurate and appropriate entry point and an optimal combination of measures. In view of this, it is very important to comprehensively explore the driving factors behind the energy trade of RCEP countries. Therefore, this paper focuses on the regional scope of the RCEP. Firstly, based on the actual data, this paper analyzes in depth the trade complementary advantages of different energy sources (categorized into three traditional fossil energy sources, namely oil, coal and natural gas, and six renewable energy sources, namely solar energy, wind power, bioenergy, hydraulic power, geothermal energy, and ocean energy) in RCEP countries, to determine the realistic conditions for regional energy trade cooperation. The second is to explore the important factors affecting different types of energy trade using the trade gravity model. Finally, based on whether to propose a detailed plan for carbon neutrality targets, this paper further analyzes how to shape the energy trade impact pattern between China and RCEP countries in order to seek the best measures for energy trade cooperation.
2. Literature Review
Energy trade is a long-standing research topic. Many scholars have found that energy trade is inextricably linked with economic development, energy security, energy consumption, and carbon emissions. Energy trade boosts economic growth [
3,
4] to enhance energy security [
5,
6] and to reduce regional carbon dioxide emissions [
7,
8,
9]. As the world’s energy supply and demand pattern becomes more multidimensional, international energy cooperation is also facing renewal and evolution. In the complex energy trade situation, the structure of energy trade has changed. More and more countries are actively seeking regional energy trade cooperation to address new situations and problems in the international energy market. Based on this, regional energy cooperation has become a hot topic of current research. The current energy trade cooperation faces many challenges, such as the limitations and uneven distribution of fossil energy carriers, the increasing dependence on energy consumption and fossil fuels, and the influence of geopolitical layout, which may lead to the uncertainty of regional energy trade cooperation [
10,
11,
12,
13]. In spite of this, there is still strong energy complementarity and huge energy trade potential among regional countries. Energy import and export trade among countries helps to enhance regional energy security and has great room for cooperation and development prospects [
14,
15,
16].
In addition, under the background of the great change in global energy supply and demand patterns and the increasingly serious global climate pollution problem, the call for regional energy trade cooperation is getting stronger, and the exploration of the driving factors behind energy trade cooperation has also become the focus of research. Initially, most scholars mainly focused on fossil energy, focusing on macro-level elements, such as the global political landscape [
12], global conflicts of interest [
17], policy trade sanctions [
18], economic development [
4], and trade and investment barriers [
6]. In recent years, more and more attention has been paid to the analysis of micro factors. It is generally believed that the development of energy industry trade is the result of the comprehensive effect of many factors, among which market conditions and scale, geographical distance, and factor endowment have significant effects [
16]. Location advantages can bring more convenient trade and logistics conditions, and the regional agglomeration characteristics of the global value chain can also achieve the growth of trade volume [
19,
20]. In addition, technological innovation has injected technological advantages into the energy trade [
21]. The energy trade environment and energy complementarity determine the process of energy trade cooperation to a certain extent [
15]. At present, the global pollution pressure is becoming more and more serious, and the demand for renewable energy is increasing, which is leading to academic research on the factors influencing renewable energy import and export. It mainly focuses on the situational analysis of a country or a region, with more analysis of the Asian region [
22,
23]. The significant influencing factors obtained are not the same. It is generally believed that GDP, population, renewable energy consumption, renewable energy complementarity, policy adjustments, market demand, tariff conditions, and other factors have a greater effect [
21,
24,
25].
In summary, the research on related issues mainly adopts two empirical methods. The first is the systematic network analysis method. Specifically, by analyzing the complex network system composed of multinational nodes, the role of each country in the system is studied to promote the formation of a multi-polar trade pattern [
26,
27]. For example, by using the network analysis method, it is found that there is a dynamic competitive relationship in the coal trade, where the coal competition network has changed from a core-periphery structure to a network structure, with competition intensity of the coal trade continuing to rise [
28,
29]. Inter-regional natural gas trade links continue to deepen, and the development of the liquefied natural gas trade is faster than that of the pipeline natural gas trade. The integration of the international natural gas market and inter-regional liquefied natural gas trade is highly correlated and mutually influential [
30,
31,
32]. The second method is the trade gravity model. This model mainly explores the potential of inter-regional energy trade cooperation [
33,
34,
35] and analyzes the influencing factors of energy trade [
36]. For example, through the establishment of the trade gravity model, the potential of natural gas trade between China and Russia is empirically analyzed [
33]. Based on the analysis model of China–EU green trade cooperation potential (i.e., the trade gravity model), the development direction of China–EU green energy trade is analyzed. Using the trade gravity model, the host country’s GDP, commodity trade conditions, population size, and exchange rate affect the export of new energy vehicles [
36]. An in-depth analysis of the important factors influencing the energy trade between China and Indonesia shows that energy imports are mainly determined by each other’s trade environment and energy complementarity [
15]. Based on the above comparison, it is found that the analysis of the influencing factors of regional energy trade is mostly based on the trade gravity model, which is also the main method of this paper’s follow-up research.
All in all, all members of the RCEP have promised to reduce tariffs and standard barriers, which is conducive to strengthening regional trade cooperation, which is also applicable to energy trade. At the same time, according to the current research status, the academic community has launched a heated discussion on the issue of regional energy trade. Most are analyses of a single global energy trading network, with relatively few studies addressing the regional scope of RCEP. However, most of the existing research on RCEP regional issues is to analyze a series of issues, such as the prospect and impact of economic trade [
37,
38] or the complementarity and influencing factors of fossil energy trade. However, these studies do not compare fossil energy trade with renewable energy trade within a research system. Based on this, with reference to previous studies, this paper makes the following contributions to the related research of regional energy cooperation: (1) The theory of comparative advantage is introduced into the field of energy trade. At present, the RCA index is one of the most widely used indexes to measure global and domestic product trade [
39,
40]. According to the comparative advantages of energy trade in various countries, the trade cooperation advantages of RCEP countries are analyzed by means of the RCA index and trade complementarity index. (2) It breaks through the research limitations of focusing on a single energy source and a single region by conducting a comparative analysis of the trade of three kinds of fossil energy and six kinds of renewable energy in RCEP countries, which enriches the research dimension of energy trade. (3) Based on whether to propose a detailed plan for carbon neutrality targets, this paper further analyzes how the carbon neutrality targets shape the energy trade impact pattern between China and RCEP countries. In this way, the best measures for energy trade cooperation are sought.
3. Advantages of Energy Trade Cooperation
Energy trade between RCEP countries is still an important part of regional economic and trade integration. In any case, regional energy trade and cooperation have certain prospects. Based on this, first of all, it is necessary to analyze the external dependence of national energy products from the actual trade situation of the region to explore the basic conditions of cooperation. Secondly, with the help of the RCA index and the TCI, this paper analyzes the international market competitiveness of energy and the complementarity of energy trade to encourage countries to choose appropriate energy trade partners.
3.1. Regional Energy Consumption and Trade Status
As far as fossil energy is concerned, the
BP World Energy Statistics Yearbook 2024 shows that China has consistently ranked first in consumption in the Asia-Pacific region. The consumption of oil and natural gas is higher than production, and both depend on imports. In 2023, China’s oil imports increased by 13%, natural gas imports increased by 9.4% [
41], and coal production exceeded consumption. The production of fossil energy in ASEAN countries exceeds consumption. Indonesia is rich in coal and natural gas resources, and oil is dependent on imports. Japan and the Republic of Korea are relatively deficient in energy resources, and fossil energy is dependent on imports, of which Japan imports
$ 1690.27 billion in 2023. Australia is a major energy producer, and its export ranks third in the world. In 2023, the growth rate of coal production was 3.6%, and the natural gas production was 153.5 billion cubic meters. China had become the world’s largest importer of liquid natural gas by 2023, with one-third of its imports coming from Australia due to its strong demand for fossil energy. In addition, according to United Nations Statistics (UNCTAD), 96% of New Zealand’s trade volume in 2023 came from countries in the RCEP region, followed by ASEAN (49.8%), Australia (41.5%), Japan (38.6%), and China (15.7%).
In terms of renewable energy, China (27.49 AJ) accounts for the largest share of the total consumption of renewable energy (including hydropower) in the Asia-Pacific region, which is 68.5%, and the annual growth rate is 8.0%. Following China, the major consumers of renewable energy in the region are Japan (2.19 AJ, 5.4%), Vietnam (1.11 AJ, 2.8%), Indonesia (1.06 AJ, 2.6%), Australia (0.90 AJ, 2.2%), and the Republic of Korea (0.59 AJ, 1.5%). Among various types of energy, solar energy consumption is the largest. China (5.46 AJ) accounts for the largest share of total consumption in the Asia-Pacific region, which is 63.0%, and the annual growth rate is 36.2%. It is followed by Japan (0.9, 6.1%), Australia (0.42, 19.4%), Vietnam (0.24, −0.5%), and the Republic of Korea (0.27, −4.8%). Compared with other countries, China has the largest consumption of solar energy, wind energy, geothermal energy, and biomass energy, followed by Japan. In addition, considering the renewable energy trade volume of each country, 62.3% of Australia’s solar energy trade volume in 2023 came from RCEP countries, followed by ASEAN (61.7%), Japan (61.5%), New Zealand (51.9%), and China (30.5%). Among the trade volume of wind energy, ASEAN has the largest number of countries in the RCEP region as trade options, accounting for 55.4% of the total trade volume of ASEAN, followed by Japan (51.5%), New Zealand (50.1%), Australia (45.2%), and China (28.1%). Among the geothermal energy trade volume, Australia is the country with the most trade options in the RCEP region, accounting for 57.3%, followed by ASEAN (51.6%), Japan (50.1%), New Zealand (39.6%), and China (26.7%). Among the trade volume of biomass energy, 51.4% of ASEAN trade volume comes from RCEP region countries, followed by New Zealand (47.3%), Japan (47.1%), China (39.6%), and Australia (37.3%) [
41].
In summary, the demand for fossil energy in RCEP countries is still large, and the consumption of renewable energy is also increasing. At the same time, the trade volume of fossil energy between regions is dominant, and the trade of renewable energy is becoming more and more frequent. Therefore, the trade cooperation between RCEP countries has a certain foundation. Next, we will further analyze the advantages of China’s inter-regional energy trade cooperation from the perspective of competitiveness and complementarity.
3.2. Comparative Advantage of Energy Trade
From the perspective of the RCA index, an RCA index >2.5 usually indicates that the country’s products have the highest international competitiveness, 1.25 ≤ RCA ≤ 2.5 indicates that the country’s products have stronger international competitiveness, 0.8 ≤ RCA ≤ 1.25 indicates that the country’s products have strong international competitiveness, and an RCA < 0.8 indicates that the country’s international competitiveness of such products is weak. As shown in
Table 1, RCEP countries have strong international competitiveness in energy, especially renewable energy. Among them, solar energy has the strongest comparative advantage (four countries with an RCA index greater than 1, with a maximum value of 2.85, indicating strong international competitiveness), followed by geothermal energy (three countries with an RCA index greater than 1, with a maximum value of 1.53, indicating strong international competitiveness), biomass energy (two countries with an RCA index greater than 1, with a maximum value of 1.89, indicating strong international competitiveness). In terms of specific national conditions, Australian coal has strong international competitiveness (the RCA index is far more than 20). The RCA index of coal, natural gas, and solar energy in ASEAN countries is greater than 1, and the competitiveness is decreasing. The international competitiveness of renewable energy in China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea is stronger than that of traditional energy. In addition to biomass energy, China’s RCA index is greater than 1, indicating that solar energy has strong international competitiveness, water energy has strong competitiveness, and surplus energy has strong competitiveness. The RCA index of the Republic of Korea is greater than 1, except for wind energy. Solar energy also has strong international competitiveness, hydropower has strong competitiveness, and remaining energy has strong competitiveness. On the whole, RCEP countries have varying comparative advantages across different energy products, which provides a good foundation for energy trade cooperation.
3.3. Energy Trade Complementarity
Based on the above comparative advantage analysis, the complementarity of energy trade in RCEP countries can be further studied. According to the advantages and disadvantages of a product in different countries, when a product has a greater comparative advantage in the exporting country and a greater comparative disadvantage in the importing country, the trade complementarity of that product between the two countries is strong. Therefore, the trade complementarity index (TCI) proposed by Drysdale (1967) [
43] is used for reference, and the specific calculation formula is as follows:
In the above formula, k is the product, and i and j are the countries. If the TCI > 1, it shows that the trade complementarity between the two countries is strong, and the greater the value, the stronger the complementarity; if the TCI < 1, the trade complementarity between the two countries is weak, and the smaller the value, the weaker the complementarity. This paper calculates the energy trade complementarity index of RCEP countries from 2011 to 2023, and the results are shown in
Table 2 below.
Taking China as an exporter, on the annual average, the TCI values of China’s exports and RCEP imports from 2011 to 2023 are both greater than 0, but the complementary strength is not high. In terms of energy types, the complementarity of renewable energy is stronger than that of traditional energy. Among them, solar energy has the strongest complementarity (all TCI values are greater than 1), with a maximum value of 3.48. It is followed by hydropower (China’s bilateral trade TCI value with four countries exceeds 1, with a maximum value of 1.55), ocean energy (China’s bilateral trade TCI value with three countries exceeds 1, with a maximum value of 1.63), and wind energy (China’s bilateral trade TCI value with three countries exceeds 1, with a maximum value of 1.39). As far as countries are concerned, China and Australia have the strongest energy complementarity, followed by ASEAN countries, while China and Japan have the worst energy complementarity.
Taking China as the importing country (see
Table 3), on the annual average, the TCI values of China’s imports and RCEP exports from 2011 to 2023 are both greater than 0, but the complementary strength is quite different. In terms of energy types, the complementarity of traditional energy is stronger than that of renewable energy. Among them, coal is the most complementary, with a maximum value of more than 30, followed by natural gas (a maximum value of 7.87). Although the TCI of solar energy exceeds 1 in three countries, the complementarity intensity is not high (a maximum value of 6.72). As far as countries are concerned, China and Australia have the strongest energy complementarity, followed by ASEAN countries, while China and New Zealand have the worst energy complementarity.
Based on the above analysis, China mainly relies on imports for fossil energy, while it mainly focuses on exports for renewable energy. The complementarity of traditional energy is stronger. Although there are more countries with TCI values greater than 1 in bilateral trade of renewable energy, they are obviously smaller and less complementary. China and Australia have the strongest energy complementarity, followed by ASEAN countries. Based on the actual data and various indexes, the trade cooperation between China and RCEP countries has a certain foundation, and the complementarity of energy trade is strong, indicating that the advantages of energy trade cooperation between China and the region are also strong. Furthermore, it is found that both energy trade competition and energy trade complementarity affect regional energy trade cooperation. Based on this, in order to promote RCEP regional energy trade cooperation, it is necessary to explore the influencing factors behind it to seek effective ways of energy cooperation.
6. Conclusions
In view of the fact that RCEP countries are important partners in China’s energy trade cooperation, this paper takes inter-regional energy trade cooperation as the starting point, analyzes in depth the differences in energy consumption and trade status, and then explains the complementary advantages of various types of energy trade in RCEP countries. Finally, the trade gravity model is used to explore the important factors affecting energy trade and seek the best measures for energy trade cooperation.
The following conclusions are drawn: (1) The demand for fossil energy in RCEP countries is still large, and the consumption of renewable energy is also increasing. At the same time, the trade volume of fossil energy between regions is dominant, and the trade of renewable energy is becoming more and more frequent. (2) RCEP countries have different comparative advantages among different energy products, which provides a good foundation for energy trade cooperation. (3) For fossil energy, China primarily relies on imports, while for renewable energy, it mainly focuses on exports. The complementarity of traditional energy is stronger. Although there are more countries with TCI values greater than 1 in bilateral trade of renewable energy, they are obviously smaller and less complementary. China and Australia have the strongest energy complementarity, followed by ASEAN countries. (4) On the whole, GDP, the trade complementarity index, economic liberalization, the trade environment, and the technological level can effectively affect fossil energy trade and renewable energy trade. Population and geographical distance have nothing to do with energy trade. The effect of the exchange rate level on the two types of energy trade is inconsistent. (5) Whether it is fossil energy or renewable energy, when completing the detailed planning of carbon neutrality targets, significant factors have a stronger effect on trade, and the improvement of relevant factors can better promote energy trade.
In any case, in view of the fact that many factors and data limitations make it impossible to accurately assess the specific influence of some factors on energy trade between China and RCEP countries, this paper does not discuss the comparison of these factors in depth but analyzes how they play a role in the transaction process from an overall perspective, which makes the research scope and depth of this paper slightly insufficient. Therefore, in the future, we should adopt a variety of quantitative empirical methods to analyze the specific value range of the factors that promote energy trade to explore the best way to realize the energy trade cooperation between China and RCEP countries.
The scale of energy trade between China and RCEP countries is growing, and the volume of bilateral trade is gradually increasing. In the process of this rapid growth, there are also some problems and negative effects.
Firstly, it is necessary to strengthen communication on energy policies among RCEP member countries and encourage industrial cooperation in the field of regional energy. Furthermore, a reduction in non-tariff trade barriers should be explored. (According to the previous research, non-tariff factors, such as technology and exchange rates, have a significant impact on trade, so trade cooperation needs to take technical measures—see below.) Enhancing energy trade interconnection will help expand economic freedom and openness, accelerate the implementation of relevant tariff policies under the agreement, strive to improve customs clearance efficiency, and reduce time costs. Secondly, energy technology is the basis for strengthening international cooperation, and it is necessary to promote core energy technology. This study found that improvements in technological levels will force adjustments in the energy structure, which, in turn, will affect regional energy trade. Thirdly, starting from the actual needs of energy partners and in accordance with local conditions, precise energy docking cooperation should be achieved, and an RCEP energy cooperation demonstration zone should be established. For example, in-depth cooperation should be pursued in specific energy categories such as crude oil, liquefied natural gas (LNG), and energy chemicals such as light cycle oil (LCO). At the same time, China should coordinate the integration and complementarity of traditional energy and renewable energy to expand energy cooperation. Finally, it is necessary to clarify the carbon-neutral target planning and set up a clear route and target supervision mechanism. Otherwise, due to the lack of a clear policy mechanism and a perfect target supervision and accountability mechanism, many countries’ carbon neutrality goals will fail in the future [
50], which will affect the progress of regional energy trade. The vast majority of the current RCEP countries that have proposed carbon neutrality targets have made slow progress, and the region’s demand for fossil energy and trade volume dominate. In this regard, drawing on the detailed planning of New Zealand and Australia, we will focus on improving measures in the energy sector.