China and other developing economies are instinctively wary of developed-country proposals to combine domestic carbon prices with \u201ccarbon tariffs\u201d imposed on imported goods. But such policies may be the only way for rich-world consumers to take responsibility for their carbon footprint in other countries.<\/p>\n
LONDON \u2013 The climate activist\u00a0Greta Thunberg\u00a0has\u00a0accused\u00a0developed economies of \u201ccreative carbon accounting\u201d because their measures of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions, and of achieved and planned reductions, fail to consider the gases emitted when imported goods are produced in other countries. As Chinese officials quite rightly point out, about 15% of their country\u2019s emissions result when goods are made in China but consumed in other, usually richer, economies.<\/p>\n
China and other developing economies also are instinctively wary of developed-country proposals to combine domestic carbon prices with \u201ccarbon tariffs\u201d imposed on imported goods. But such policies may be the only way for rich-world consumers to take responsibility for their carbon footprint in other countries.<\/p>\n
The \u201ccreative accounting\u201d charge would be unfair if it were meant to imply deliberate concealment; the United Kingdom\u2019s government, for example, publishes an easily accessible\u00a0carbon-footprint report. But the figures certainly support Thunberg\u2019s point. In 2016, the UK emitted 784 million tons of GHGs on a consumption basis, versus 468 million tons on a production basis. And from 1997-2016, the UK\u2019s consumption-based emissions fell by only 10%, compared to a 35% decrease in production-related emissions.<\/p>\n
Likewise, the European Union\u2019s total consumption-based emissions are about\u00a019% higher\u00a0than those related to production. And while the United States\u2019 gap of 8% is smaller in percentage terms, on a tons-per<\/em>–capita<\/em> basis it is just as large.<\/p>\n China is easily the biggest counterpart to this developed-economy gap, with consumption emissions of about 8.5 gigatons per year, versus ten gigatons on a production basis. And while China\u2019s\u00a0per capita<\/em>\u00a0emissions have already overtaken the UK\u2019s on a production basis, it will be several years before the country\u2019s\u00a0per capita<\/em> consumption footprint exceeds that of the UK.<\/p>\n So, if the developed world is serious about limiting potentially catastrophic climate change, it must take responsibility for emissions that its consumption generates abroad.<\/p>\n There are only two ways to do this. One is for the rich world to consume less. But although more responsible lifestyles \u2013 buying fewer clothes, cars, and electronic goods, or eating less red meat \u2013 should certainly play a role in making zero-carbon economies possible, such changes alone will not get us close to zero emissions. Nor will they necessarily close the consumption-versus-production gap, because consumption of domestically produced goods could fall as much as that of imports. And reduced imports by developed countries mean reduced exports for poorer economies, creating challenges for economic development.