Unequal Energy Footprints: Trade-Driven Asymmetries in Consumption-Based Carbon Emissions of the U.S. and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the symmetric and asymmetric impacts of international trade on consumption-based carbon emissions (CBEs) in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the United States of America (USA) from 1990 to 2018. The analysis uses autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) and non-linear ARDL (NARDL) methodologies to capture short- and long-run trade emissions dynamics, with economic growth, oil prices, financial development and industry value addition as control variables. The findings reveal that exports reduce CBEs, while imports increase them, across both economies in the long and short run. The asymmetric analysis highlights that a fall in exports increases CBEs in the USA but reduces them in the PRC due to differences in supply chain flexibility. The PRC demonstrates larger coefficients for trade variables, reflecting its reliance on energy-intensive imports and rapid trade growth. The error correction term shows that the PRC takes 2.64 times longer than the USA to return to equilibrium after short-run shocks, reflecting systemic rigidity. These findings challenge the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis, showing that economic growth intensifies CBEs. Robustness checks confirm the results, highlighting the need for tailored policies, including carbon border adjustments, renewable energy integration and CBE-based accounting frameworks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".