Search

The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), representing approximately USD 13.5 trillion of the global GDP, is one of the largest free-trade agreements in the world. This trade agreement considers many important issues yet fails to address climate change or carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. CO2 emissions in trade are critical as all CPTPP parties have made significant carbon emissions reduction commitments of between 8-36% through the COP21- Paris Agreement. Herein lies a paradox. This study assesses the amount of embedded CO2 emissions in the CPTPP through an input-output analysis of consumption-based emissions in ten carbon-intensive sectors, under three scenarios. The results reveal that as trade between partners increases, so will CO2 emissions across those sectors. These findings are essential for policymakers who are striving to grow Partnerships (Sustainable Development Goal 17) while seeking to address Climate Action (Sustainable Development Goal 13), which appear to be conflicting goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Water Resources Journal / Revue Canadienne des Ressources Hydriques is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Global manufacturing firms are engaging distant suppliers of critical raw materials to participate in responsible sourcing. Downstream firms are concerned about risks in mineral supply chains of violent conflict, human rights violations, and poor governance, but they are limited in seeing their suppliers. Descriptive data on 323 smelters and refiners of tantalum, tin, tungsten, and gold (the "conflict minerals") were complemented by interviews with downstream firms in the electronics industry. Results provided a narrative of supplier engagement, describing tactics used to identify "deep suppliers" at chokepoints in metals supply and to persuade producers into joining due diligence programs. Top-tier firms collaborate through a standards program to overcame barriers of geography and cultural distance in supply chain management beyond the visible horizon. Curiously, manufacturers do not need line-of-sight transparency to lower-tier suppliers. Rather, top-tier firms are "jumping the chain" to engage directly with "deep suppliers" who may—or may not—be their own actual physical suppliers. The research contributes empirical evidence to understanding multi-tier supply chains, examines how power is exercised by top-tier firms managing suppliers, and provides insights on supply chain transparency. Responsible sourcing, based on due diligence guidance and standards, is becoming expected of companies that are involved in supply chains of raw materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]