{"title":"评估贸易效率:来自贸易优先、环境优先和平衡战略的见解","authors":"Yu Zhu , Dawei Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.seps.2025.102223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study employs Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess international trade efficiency, incorporating carbon dioxide emissions as an undesirable output and addressing biases in previous assessments that overlooked emissions embodied in trade. The model introduces three distinct strategic objectives: a trade priority, an environmental priority, and a balanced approach between trade and environmental concerns. The proposed framework is then applied to a sample of 42 economies.</div><div>Trade efficiency is a crucial economic measure, as it reflects an economy's capacity to maximize productive output while minimizing environmental and resource costs, thereby fostering sustainable economic growth and enhancing global competitiveness. The findings demonstrate that while the Trade Priority Strategy (TPS) yields the lowest overall average efficiency under both constant returns to scale (CRS) and variable returns to scale (VRS) assumptions, the optimal strategy for maximizing efficiency varies significantly across individual economies. Although significant efficiency differences exist across the 42 economies, within each economy, the differences in efficiency values and rankings across the three strategies are relatively minor. A comparison between Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD economies reveals that the OECD group demonstrates higher efficiency under all strategies. These results offer valuable insights for policymakers seeking to align trade and environmental policies in pursuit of sustainable development.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22033,"journal":{"name":"Socio-economic Planning Sciences","volume":"100 ","pages":"Article 102223"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing trade Efficiency: Insights from trade priority, environmental priority, and balanced strategies\",\"authors\":\"Yu Zhu , Dawei Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.seps.2025.102223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study employs Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess international trade efficiency, incorporating carbon dioxide emissions as an undesirable output and addressing biases in previous assessments that overlooked emissions embodied in trade. The model introduces three distinct strategic objectives: a trade priority, an environmental priority, and a balanced approach between trade and environmental concerns. The proposed framework is then applied to a sample of 42 economies.</div><div>Trade efficiency is a crucial economic measure, as it reflects an economy's capacity to maximize productive output while minimizing environmental and resource costs, thereby fostering sustainable economic growth and enhancing global competitiveness. The findings demonstrate that while the Trade Priority Strategy (TPS) yields the lowest overall average efficiency under both constant returns to scale (CRS) and variable returns to scale (VRS) assumptions, the optimal strategy for maximizing efficiency varies significantly across individual economies. Although significant efficiency differences exist across the 42 economies, within each economy, the differences in efficiency values and rankings across the three strategies are relatively minor. A comparison between Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD economies reveals that the OECD group demonstrates higher efficiency under all strategies. These results offer valuable insights for policymakers seeking to align trade and environmental policies in pursuit of sustainable development.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Socio-economic Planning Sciences\",\"volume\":\"100 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Socio-economic Planning Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012125000722\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socio-economic Planning Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012125000722","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing trade Efficiency: Insights from trade priority, environmental priority, and balanced strategies
This study employs Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess international trade efficiency, incorporating carbon dioxide emissions as an undesirable output and addressing biases in previous assessments that overlooked emissions embodied in trade. The model introduces three distinct strategic objectives: a trade priority, an environmental priority, and a balanced approach between trade and environmental concerns. The proposed framework is then applied to a sample of 42 economies.
Trade efficiency is a crucial economic measure, as it reflects an economy's capacity to maximize productive output while minimizing environmental and resource costs, thereby fostering sustainable economic growth and enhancing global competitiveness. The findings demonstrate that while the Trade Priority Strategy (TPS) yields the lowest overall average efficiency under both constant returns to scale (CRS) and variable returns to scale (VRS) assumptions, the optimal strategy for maximizing efficiency varies significantly across individual economies. Although significant efficiency differences exist across the 42 economies, within each economy, the differences in efficiency values and rankings across the three strategies are relatively minor. A comparison between Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and non-OECD economies reveals that the OECD group demonstrates higher efficiency under all strategies. These results offer valuable insights for policymakers seeking to align trade and environmental policies in pursuit of sustainable development.
期刊介绍:
Studies directed toward the more effective utilization of existing resources, e.g. mathematical programming models of health care delivery systems with relevance to more effective program design; systems analysis of fire outbreaks and its relevance to the location of fire stations; statistical analysis of the efficiency of a developing country economy or industry.
Studies relating to the interaction of various segments of society and technology, e.g. the effects of government health policies on the utilization and design of hospital facilities; the relationship between housing density and the demands on public transportation or other service facilities: patterns and implications of urban development and air or water pollution.
Studies devoted to the anticipations of and response to future needs for social, health and other human services, e.g. the relationship between industrial growth and the development of educational resources in affected areas; investigation of future demands for material and child health resources in a developing country; design of effective recycling in an urban setting.