We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter examines efforts to establish new global rules to restrict export subsidies for coal-fired power plants, which are highly polluting and a major contributor to climate change. Government-backed export credit for coal power plants acts as a form of export subsidy, and thus promotes the expansion of such plants abroad. The US spearheaded multilateral negotiations within the context of the OECD Arrangement to prohibit the use of export credit for coal power plants. However, since China is not part of the Arrangement, it was not a participant in the negotiations or bound by the new disciplines created. China’s absence, I argue, weighed heavily over the negotiations and undermined efforts to construct an ambitious agreement. OECD exporters were extremely resistant to agree to restrict their use of export credit when China—the world’s largest supplier of export credit for overseas coal plants, accounting for nearly half of all export credit in this sector—would face no similar restraints on supporting its exports. Without China’s participation, the impact of the resulting agreement is severely limited. This case thus highlights the difficulty of building effective global trade rules today without the participation of China.
Even when most of the public accept climate science and elect climate–sincere politicians, the fossil fuel industry and supporters have many rationalizations to delude politicians and citizens that a certain fossil fuel project is needed and consistent with national or global greenhouse gas reduction commitments. Those who see through these myths must develop “connect–the–dot” techniques to show other citizens how fossil fuel expansion in a given jurisdiction is inconsistent with global and national commitments. Success against expanding global fossil fuel supply depends especially, however, on national efforts to decarbonize electricity, transport, and other sectors that are not trade-exposed. Experts should be helping the public, media, and climate-sincere politicians with exposing the myth that “this fossil fuel project is essential.”
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.