Liberalización del Comercio de Bienes Ambientales y su Impacto en Argentina

MARIA PRISCILA RAMOS

BUENOS AIRES

Congreso; ECON 2017; 2017

Facultad de Ciencias Economicas de la Universidad de Buenos Aires

The 2001 Doha Ministerial Declaration singled out trade liberalization of environmental goods andservices (EGS) as a way to achieve sustainable development by creating a triple-win situation for trade,development, and the environment. Several proposals for EGS trade liberalization have been submittedto the World Trade Organization. This study aims to evaluate the multilateral elimination of tariffson EGS based on four lists, namely those of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), Japan, theOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the United Nations Conferenceon Trade and Development ? Environmentally Preferable Products (UNCTAD-EPP) list. By applyinga two-step methodology that combines the MIRAGE-e computable general equilibrium (CGE) modeland a microsimulation model, the study assesses the potential effects of EGS trade liberalization ontrade, welfare and its distribution across households, and CO2 emissions, with a particular focus onArgentina. In the first step, the CGE model provides changes in macroeconomic, environmental, andsector variables in different regions of the world resulting from simulated scenarios. The second stepuses changes in consumer prices and wages from the CGE model simulations to analyse the welfareimpact across households in Argentina. The findings show that the UNCTAD-EPP list is the only onethat leads to a triple-win situation for Argentina. The Japanese and APEC lists generate increases inwelfare and trade, but fail to reduce CO2 emissions in Argentina. The Japanese list creates the secondmost-significantwelfare increase after the UNCTAD-EPP list, so it can be considered as a second-bestEGS trade liberalization scenario for Argentina. The study also proposes possible ways to enhance thepositive impact of EGS trade liberalization through the introduction of different forms of special anddifferential treatment provisions for developing countries. These recommendations point to the needto go beyond the list approach, as already suggested in proposals from some developing countries.