3.5.5     Technology choices
When we look at the range of AKST and associated tech­nologies, on what then should we base our decisions as to whether a particular technology is appropriate? It cannot be just on the basis of trade considerations. A holistic as­sessment of technology requires the careful and compre­hensive examination of environmental, health, safety, legal, socioeconomic and ethical dimensions. It also requires an understanding of the short, medium and long-term effects of a technology.
     Concurrently, there is the possibility of a reform of international and national trade laws and policies where necessary, with courage and political will among decision-makers and implementation, with political will and commit­ment, of international environmental agreements and social development instruments. Finally, ensuring effective public participation and monitoring to ensure compliance with sustainable development principles, laws and programs can help guide policy-makers.

3.6      Climate Change and Trade

3.6.1     Asia in the global climate change equation
Developing Asia's economic growth has largely been based on carbon-based technologies, developed in an era of cheap carbon. Though the per capita emissions of developing Asia are still much below the levels of the USA or Europe, yet the large size of the economies means that total emissions from developing Asia are very large.
     In the pre-Kyoto discussions it was argued that the in­dustrialized North were responsible for carbon emissions and hence it was these countries that should take action to reduce carbon emissions (Agarwal and Narain, 1991). Along with this it was proposed that the developing coun­tries should be given incentives to adopt carbon-efficient technologies, through trading based on per capita rights.
     The carbon-intensive growth of developing Asia has changed the global equation with regard to actions for re­ducing carbon emissions. The developing world as a whole now accounts for almost 50% of annual carbon emissions. China is the second largest emitter, after the USA; while India is the world's fifth-largest emitter. Further, land use change resulting in deforestation itself accounts for 20 to 25% of global emissions, with Brazil and Indonesia being the two largest emitters.
     In designing policies for mitigating climate change or reducing carbon emissions, three factors now stand out. First, the developed countries bear historical responsibil­ity for the magnitude of the problem; there is question of global justice in distributing burdens for reduction of car­bon emissions. Two, without the involvement of the devel­oping countries, particularly the large economies of China and India, not much of a dent can currently be made on the scale of emissions. Third, sectors of agriculture, such as forests (through conversion of land for agricultural use) and livestock also contribute substantially to global greenhouse gas emissions.

3.6.2     International trade instruments for environmental objectives
There is often, even usually, more than one way of pro­ducing a commodity, the negative environmental effects of

which are different. But the price of the commodity would be the same, irrespective of the method used in its produc­tion. For instance, coffee grown in the shade of existing for­ests would sell for the same price as coffee grown in planta­tions. If the output of the latter process were higher, then the net income from the environment-friendly coffee pro­cess would be lower than from the environment-unfriendly plantation process. From the side of the producers there would be a disincentive to carry on the environment-friendly process.
     One approach to this problem would be that of using the "polluter pays" principle in international trade. A tax or import duty could be imposed on each commodity, depend­ing on the amount of carbon emitted in its production, the extent of forest clearance carried out, the loss of biodiver­sity through the production process and so on. The more negative externalities involved in a production process, the higher would be the import duties on its product. This re­quires a recognition that processes to produce a product can have different effects and that a product's effects are not restricted to its quality in use.
     The "shrimp-turtle" case (in which the WTO panel ruled that the US had a right to take action to conserve exhaustible resources and could require the use of turtle-extruder devices in harvesting shrimp) provides a precedent for extending trade measures, import duties or even pro­hibitions to cover various environmental externalities in production processes (Stiglitz, 2006). There could import duties for carbon emissions, loss of biodiversity, forest clear­ing and so on. Such an import duty, based on direct and indirect carbon use in production, could also be used as a manner of dealing with "free riders" who do not subscribe to international agreements on GHG emissions. The result would be to favor commodities produced with environment-friendly instead of unfriendly processes and higher costs for unfriendly processes. The tax would be paid by those who use environment-unfriendly processes and those who consume the resulting products. Such a tax on the produc­tion of negative externalities could make international trade somewhat more environment-friendly than it currently is. Low carbon-using processes, e.g., that of the Chinese vil­lage of Liuminying, which has developed an integrated gas-energy-fertilizer system, based on animal and field waste, would then have a price advantage over similar products of more carbon-using technologies; or bird-friendly coffee in managed agro-forests would be cheaper than sun-coffee in plantations (ICRAF, 2006).
     Adding carbon taxes is also likely to make certain com­modities les amenable to international trade. Transport to more carbon-using destinations, such as those covered by jet transport, is likely to become less profitable than transport to less carbon-using destinations. This will promote low food-mile destinations over high food-mile destinations, af­fecting the existing pattern of international trade. Further, high-value commodities will be less affected than low-value commodities. Prices will go up of, say, cut flowers, which is likely to reduce demand for the same. This would affect developing Asia's export of cut flowers.
     Utilizing import duties and other trade instruments in order to bring various negative (and positive) environmental externalities into the picture, would require building an ac-