Correction: Effect of green trade barriers on export enterprise green technological innovation from the perspective of the low-carbon city pilot policy

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

🔬研究者:Provides empirical evidence on how environmental regulations and trade barriers jointly affect firm innovation, useful for policy evaluation research.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights the importance of aligning with international environmental standards to maintain export competitiveness and access to green technology.

🏛政策担当者:Offers insights into the design of low-carbon city policies and their potential to stimulate green innovation in export-oriented sectors.

With the rise in emissions from agricultural, livestock, and industrial sectors (Elahi et al., 2024;Buntaine et al., 2024;Abbas et al., 2023;Yu et al., 2022;Kang and Silveira, 2021), the global climate continues to warm, and severe weather events such as floods and droughts are occurring frequently, severely impacting human survival and sustainable economic development. To protect their ecological environment and public health, some countries have adopted Green Technical Barriers to Trade (GTBTs) within international trade, these are trade measures, regulations, and standards, that restrict or prohibit the import of highly polluting products (Liu et al., 2020). However, as international trade gradually expands and governments become more involved in trade, GTBTs have become the most frequently used non-tariff barrier for creating trade friction in the international market (Liu et al., 2023). Unlike most non-tariff barriers, GTBTs have four main characteristics: rationality, crypticity, targeting, and effectiveness (Crowley et al., 2018). Therefore, some countries that promote trade protectionism in the name of environmental protection have set strict environmental standards to boycott imports of goods from other countries (Peng et al., 2024). According to the WTO's annual Technical Barriers to Trade reports, there were 556 environment-related technical barriers to trade (TBT) notifications in 2021, accounting for approximately 1/ 4 of all TBT notifications. GTBTs' role as sanction tools in international trade negatively impacts developing countries' trade exports which cannot be ignored (Zhou et al., 2023).As China continues its high-level opening-up to the outside world, green technological innovation (GTI) has become a new advantage to cultivate international economic cooperation and competition (Du et al., 2021). In recent years, China's foreign trade has faced unpredictable uncertainties owing to trade protectionism, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, global climate action, and supply chain restructuring (Wible, 2021). Weakening international demand and increasing pressure to maintain stable growth in imports and exports have significantly weakened the positive impact on sustainable economic development (Yan et al., 2024). The impact of non-tariff barriers on China's export trade has received widespread attention from academia. However, the existing literature mainly focuses on the effect of anti-dumping and countervailing on changes in export scale (Crowley et al., 2018), export product quality (Zhang, 2022), and supply chain efficiency (Grossman et al., 2024), among others, and insufficient attention has been paid regarding how GTBTs affect the GTI of export enterprises. Given China's massive export volume and significant global market share, it is vulnerable to restrictions on GTBTs in international trade with Chinese enterprises lagging behind developed nations in green production and environmental protection practices (Chandra, 2016). Accordingly, GTBTs have become an important academic topic for researchers in the field of non-tariff barriers to trade and sustainable development.Furthermore, to ensure the coordinated achievement of pollution prevention and high-quality economic development, the Chinese government proposed the low-carbon city pilot policy (LCCPP). Since it began in 2012, the scope of the pilot has continuously expanded; it now includes six provinces, 80 cities, and one region (Shi et al., 2024). The LCCPP represents a significant strategic measure by China to actively pursue green, sustainable, and innovative development. Lowcarbon cities have strengthened clean production standards, energy-saving low-carbon technology standards, and carbon footprint evaluation standards, promoting the alignment of domestic environmental standards with international environmental standards (Emerick et al., 2016). Low-carbon cities also explicitly encourage enterprises to increase investment in green technology research and development (R&D), provide a favorable policy environment and innovative resources to support enterprises in conducting high-quality, high-tech, and high-value-added GTI, and promote the effect of pollution reduction and carbon reduction through green lowcarbon technology R&D, thereby contributing to the achievement of the "dual carbon" goals (Zhou et al., 2022). Meanwhile, to avoid imposing carbon tariffs due to GTBTs from developing countries, export enterprises need to follow the global low-carbon development trend, stay close to the forefront of international green technology, and continuously achieve the GTI to adapt to the global low-carbon technology revolution and low-carbon industry transformation (Li et al., 2022). This ultimately ensures that the products or services produced by the enterprise meet the environmental requirements of international consumers and further promotes the sustainable development of export enterprises.This study explores the impact of the LCCPP on the GTI of export enterprises with the effect of GTBTs. Scholars have studied the relationship between GTBTs and enterprise innovation but have not reached a consensus. First, GTBTs negatively impact enterprises' innovation activities. Some studies have suggested that carbon tariffs increase trade costs and reduce enterprises' expected earnings. Enterprises tend to reduce innovation investments to avoid the risks posed by trade risks (Chandra and Long, 2013). GTBTs also improve international market access conditions and limit opportunities for enterprises to access overseas markets and resources. Mayer et al. (2014) found that GTBTs cause market competition, price stimulation, and income inhibition effects, which negatively impact enterprise innovation. However, the theory of optimal allocation of resources and the resource-based theory suggest that GTBTs have positive effects on enterprise innovation. Pan et al. (2022) found that, in the face of trade barriers and external challenges, some enterprises with low production efficiency have retreated from international markets (Pan et al., 2022). Export enterprises that continue to operate in the original market increase their investment in R&D, which improves their total factor productivity and innovation capabilities to bear risks and market The GTBTs also and trade (Liu et al., 2023). Export enterprises meet the of new markets by developing new products and market which the of enterprises innovation and development to with research has been on the relationship between the LCCPP and GTI of export and there are in the academic and Some studies suggest that export enterprises continuously in technological and product innovation through scale and scope competition, and effects to adapt to foreign environmental standards and in international market et al. used the green of and found that the of the LCCPP the GTI of export enterprises and the GTI of through government public and et al., 2021). et al. studied the impact of GTI from the of environmental that strict environmental enterprises' for green innovation and that environmental more significantly impact green innovation (Du et al., 2021). In et al. (2022) not the role of the LCCPP in promoting green innovation in cities, but also their The that the LCCPP the green innovation in and cities and achieve effects in and cities et al., 2022). from the of et al. found that the LCCPP not to the green innovation of export enterprises but also the GTI of the city the enterprises were et al., 2021). et al. studied the and environmental in China and that avoid environmental by their their green (Peng et al., 2024). et al. have the effects of the of the and found that there have insufficient to promote the development of green et al., studies have First, most studies the GTI as an to the impact on the export export or export of enterprises through innovation and not the effect of the LCCPP on the GTI of export enterprises. in the face of trade friction and the development of global low-carbon trade, the innovation effect of GTBTs has not on export enterprises. Export enterprises are vulnerable to the effects of international environmental and economic policy on existing study focuses on China's export enterprises between and 2021, the to the effects of GTBTs on China's export enterprises' the LCCPP is as to the LCCPP export enterprises with the impact of the The of study are as First, on trade the enterprise GTI trade and government policy thereby the for how GTBTs and the LCCPP export enterprises' the effects of study explores government support for export enterprises' GTI through the LCCPP and the effect of LCCPP with policy and This research a for export enterprises to innovation increasing the high-tech, high-value-added green products to through the promoting the GTI to the with government increasing the and of international market and low-carbon development and green maintain sustainable development and the relationship between trade and environmental environmental protection are the import and export of trade strict environmental for countries have a of technical standards and to limit or the import of foreign the need to the ecological and human increasing trade costs through GTBTs have which have a on existing enterprises in the export market and a on new (Chandra, ultimately to a in the of export a of advantage in and cause enterprises the international market or the trade et al., GTBTs to of market access and for export enterprises to meet the standards in the (Crowley et al., 2018). The of a technology that export enterprises are to GTBTs and to export with a product and This not the of but also domestic access to GTI and in international technology it to the of GTI and the of export enterprises' green technology and innovation in (Pan et al., 2022). Export enterprises GTBTs by trade enterprises not need to or their enterprises GTBTs set by a in to actively to maintain market access in that

• openalex https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2025.1652692first seen 2026-08-02 18:32:50