Next Article in Journal
‘A Slow Build-Up of a History of Kindness’: Exploring the Potential of Community-Led Housing in Alleviating Loneliness
Next Article in Special Issue
Health and Economic Impact Assessment of Transport and Industry PM2.5 Control Policy in Guangdong Province
Previous Article in Journal
Truck Impact on Buried Water Pipes in Interdependent Water and Road Infrastructures
Previous Article in Special Issue
Regional Assessment of Land and Water Carrying Capacity and Utilization Efficiency in China
 
 
Article

Economic Benefits and Pollutants Emission Embodied in China–US Merchandise Trade—Comparative Analysis Based on Gross Trade, Value Added Trade and Value Added in Trade

by *,† and
College of Economics, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Academic Editor: Piergiuseppe Morone
Sustainability 2021, 13(20), 11322; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011322
Received: 27 July 2021 / Revised: 27 September 2021 / Accepted: 7 October 2021 / Published: 13 October 2021
The main focuses of the Sino–US trade dispute are the issue of trade interests. If taking environmental costs into consideration, the trade interests are even more overestimated. There are different methods for measuring trade interests, and the results obtained under different methods differ. This paper uses the gross trade, value-added trade and value-added-in trade framework to calculate the economic gains and correspondent embodied pollution in China–US trade, compares the differences in results under different models and makes possible explanations. Our conclusions are as follows: (1) Traditional gross trade statistics have overestimated China’s economic benefits. The trade balance in gross trade was overestimated by 35% and 40% compared to the value-added trade and value-added-in trade. (2) China was a net exporter of embodied pollution and paid huge environmental costs from 1995 to 2011. (3) China’s exports are environmentally worse than the United States, and the calculation of pollution terms of trade proves that China paid a greater environmental cost for the same amount of economic benefits. (4) Different accounting frameworks have a great impact on the embodied pollution results at the industry level. Pollution based on value-added trade was more concentrated. The major polluting industries also changed. View Full-Text
Keywords: China–US merchandise trade; gross trade; value-added trade; value-added-in trade China–US merchandise trade; gross trade; value-added trade; value-added-in trade
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

He, L.-Y.; Huang, H. Economic Benefits and Pollutants Emission Embodied in China–US Merchandise Trade—Comparative Analysis Based on Gross Trade, Value Added Trade and Value Added in Trade. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11322. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011322

AMA Style

He L-Y, Huang H. Economic Benefits and Pollutants Emission Embodied in China–US Merchandise Trade—Comparative Analysis Based on Gross Trade, Value Added Trade and Value Added in Trade. Sustainability. 2021; 13(20):11322. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011322

Chicago/Turabian Style

He, Ling-Yun, and Hui Huang. 2021. "Economic Benefits and Pollutants Emission Embodied in China–US Merchandise Trade—Comparative Analysis Based on Gross Trade, Value Added Trade and Value Added in Trade" Sustainability 13, no. 20: 11322. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011322

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop