Regulatory Fragmentation in Digital Services Trade and Carbon Intensity: Hard and Soft Barriers and the Role of Environmental Policy

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Scholars in trade and environmental economics will find the decomposition of hard vs. soft regulatory barriers and their differential impacts on carbon intensity a novel contribution.

🏛政策担当者:Policymakers working on digital trade agreements and carbon border adjustments should consider the potential of regulatory fragmentation to undermine carbon efficiency in trade.

This study examines how regulatory heterogeneity in digital services trade relates to the carbon intensity of bilateral trade flows. Using a structural gravity framework estimated with Poisson pseudo maximum likelihood (PPML), we analyzed 10,719 bilateral observations from the Eora Multi-Region Input–Output (MRIO) database over 2014–2020. Bilateral gaps in the OECD Digital Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (DSTRI) were used as the main measure of regulatory heterogeneity, and the overall gap was decomposed into infrastructure-related hard barriers and institutional soft barriers. The results suggest that digital regulatory gaps are associated with a higher carbon intensity in trade while also being associated with lower total embodied emissions through reduced trade volumes. This indicates that lower aggregate emissions under regulatory divergence may reflect contraction in trade activity rather than genuine environmental improvement. The decomposition analysis further suggests that infrastructure-related misalignment is more closely associated with carbon inefficiency, whereas institutional divergence operates mainly through its association with trade volume. In addition, environmental policy stringency in the importing country appears to strengthen the positive association between institutional regulatory gaps and carbon intensity, consistent with the possibility of regulatory overload. The study contributes to the sustainability literature by showing that carbon intensity provides a more informative indicator of sustainable trade performance than aggregate emissions alone in fragmented regulatory environments. It also suggests that digital governance, trade policy, and environmental policy should be considered together in promoting more sustainable forms of international trade, particularly in the context of emerging policy frameworks such as WTO digital trade negotiations, OECD digital governance initiatives, and carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs).

• openalex https://doi.org/10.3390/su18084031first seen 2026-05-15 18:23:16