A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE EFFECTS OF THE EU CARBON BORDER ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM (CBAM) ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EU炭素国境調整メカニズム（CBAM）が国際貿易に与える影響に関する系統的文献レビュー (AI 翻訳)
Rahmi Çetin
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本レビューは、EUの炭素国境調整メカニズム（CBAM）が国際貿易に与える影響を32の学術論文・報告書から分析。一部は炭素漏出防止に必要と評価するが、大半は貿易紛争リスク、WTO整合性の不確実性、途上国への不公平な負担を指摘。CBAMは現状では効果的な気候対策ではなく、貿易規制手段として機能する可能性が高いと結論づける。
English
This systematic literature review synthesizes 32 peer-reviewed articles on CBAM's trade implications. While a minority view CBAM as necessary to prevent carbon leakage, the majority highlight risks of global welfare losses, trade disputes, WTO inconsistency, and disproportionate burdens on developing nations. The study concludes that CBAM in its current form may operate more as a trade-regulating instrument than an effective climate solution.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本はEUへの主要輸出国であり、CBAMは自動車・鉄鋼などの輸出に影響を与える可能性がある。日本政府はカーボンプライシングの導入を検討中で、本レビューはCBAMの設計課題やWTO適合性に関する示唆を提供する。
In the global GX context
CBAM represents a landmark climate-trade policy with global ripple effects. This review systematically maps academic critiques—trade retaliation, legal uncertainty, and equity concerns—that are critical for policymakers worldwide as CBAM moves toward full implementation in 2026.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Identifies key research gaps (e.g., sectoral impact studies, WTO legal analysis) and the asymmetry in the literature on CBAM.
🏢実務担当者:Provides an overview of compliance and strategic risks for exporting firms to the EU market.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights WTO compatibility issues and the need for cooperative frameworks, informing domestic carbon pricing and trade negotiations.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study examines how the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is assessed in the academic literature with respect to its implications for international trade. Employing a systematic literature review (SLR) methodology the study synthesises findings from 32 peer-reviewed journal articles and institutional reports published between January 2020 and July 2024. The review reveals a pronounced asymmetry in the literature. While a limited number of studies frame CBAM as a necessary instrument to prevent carbon leakage and safeguard the EU’s climate ambition, the dominant body of research identifies significant economic, legal, and distributive risks. These include potential global welfare losses, heightened risks of trade disputes and retaliation, legal uncertainty regarding compatibility with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and disproportionate burdens on developing, least developed, and small island economies despite their minimal contribution to historical greenhouse gas emissions. Across disciplinary perspectives, scholars frequently emphasise that CBAM’s unilateral design constitutes a central source of legitimacy and equity concerns, as it conflicts with the cooperative foundations of international climate governance. Overall, the literature suggests that, in its current form, CBAM is more likely to operate as a trade-regulating instrument with limited environmental additionality rather than as an effective global climate solution. The review therefore highlights the need for more cooperative and inclusive climate–trade frameworks that incorporate differentiation, revenue recycling, climate finance, and technology transfer. The study concludes by outlining key policy implications and research gaps as CBAM moves from regulatory design toward full implementation.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.53662/esamdergisi.1811863first seen 2026-05-15 18:19:41
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。