Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 5. Shares of revenue payments and receipts
(The table is quoted directly from IMERS, 2007
and IMO, 2008)
CONCLUSION
The maritime transportation sector contributes
significantly to the growing international trade.
Reducing trade due to higher transportation cost
has caused increasing concerns from the develop-
ing countries, which requires the right of devel-
opment to be respected. Countries therefore are
divided for different policy options.
However, estimates have shown that the con-
tributions of vessel-based CO 2 reduction cost are
small to the cost increase in the international trade.
Big countries are especially well positioned. Small
countries, at least small island countries will have
severe losses due to the increasing trade cost,
deserving more attention from the governments
and international regulators.
Both developing countries and developed
countries have their concerns and both sides have
legal ground in this issue. The WWF and IMERS
proposal to solve this issue is a good start. It does
not distort trade, addresses the equity issue that
posed significant disadvantages to small island
countries, make developed countries take more
responsibility, and benefit developing countries
more than they pay for. The proposal may not
be adopted by policy makers, but it has the right
direction as how to collect and distribute GHG
fund from ships and address the CBDR issue at
the same time.
Share of
Revenue
Payment
Share of
Revenue
Receipts
Country Group
Developed Countries
59%
5%
Economies in Transition
(without Russia)
2%
3%
BRIC (Brazil, Russia,
India, and China)
16%
30%
Least Developed Countries
(LDCs)
1%
15%
Small Island Developing
States (SIDS)
1%
4%
Other Developing Coun-
tries
22%
44%
offset by the extra rebates distributed from the
central authority. The equity issue is resolved also
since small countries, as illustrated earlier, are
victims of the global warming more than the
culprit of this problem. They deserve more help
from the other parts of the world. Other develop-
ing countries get more than what they pay for the
reduction cost. This gives other developing coun-
tries some extra money to address their domestic
CO 2 emissions and fully respect their right to
development. Their export price will not be dis-
torted due to the rebate. Therefore, they can
continue to grow their export industry and the
maritime transportation sector. The developed
countries pay more than they get, in fully respect
of the fact that the developed countries should
take the major responsibility to the global warm-
ing and historically, they emitted far more CO 2
from the shipping sector and major beneficiaries
from export and the waterborne trade. Such an
arrangement also respects the CBDR. The devel-
oped countries take more responsibility, develop-
ing countries get more benefits, and least devel-
oped countries get most. This arrangement or
similar arrangement should be considered for
future policy adoptions.
REFERENCES
Anderson, E., & Eric, W. (2004). Trade costs.
Journal of Economic Literature , 42 , 691-751.
doi:10.1257/0022051042177649
Baier, L., & Bergstrand, H. (2001). The growth of
world trade: Tariffs, transport costs, and income
similarity. Journal of International Economics ,
53 (1), 1-27. doi:10.1016/S0022-1996(00)00060-
X
Search WWH ::




Custom Search