In this paper, we use the social network method to analyze the structure of the international carbon emission network, which provides new perspectives and research methods for the study of carbon emission relations among countries. Based on the association matrix of carbon emissions among countries, we specify weight matrices and embed them into the global vector auto-regression (GVAR) model, which makes a more accurate measurement of the relationship between economic growth and carbon emissions among countries, and deeply investigate the internal relationship between international economic growth and carbon emissions. Firstly, the structural characteristics of individuals in the carbon emission network are analyzed. The results show that in the international carbon emission network, developed economies have achieved carbon transfer through importing a large number of intermediate products, and their in-degree in the international carbon emission network is large. Comparatively, the BRIC countries and the emerging economies have received carbon imports from developed countries while exporting products, resulting in their high out-degree. Developed countries have achieved " products import and carbon export”, while developing countries have shown the characteristics of " products export and carbon import”. China has established a large number of production links with other countries through processing trade and other ways, and then the carbon emission links have been established and become increasingly close. In general, the centrality of developed economies is relatively stable in the international carbon emission network, while the degree of centrality in developing countries or emerging economies has increased significantly. Based on the network structure characteristic analysis of the international carbon emission matrix, we further explore the impacts of one country’s economic growth on other countries’ carbon emissions through the carbon emission network transmission from the perspective of network association. The results show that under the shock of China’s economic growth, the changes of carbon emissions of representative economies, except India, show inverted " U” shape characteristics. The economic growth of developed countries except Japan and BRIC countries has positive effects of inverted " U” type on China’s carbon emissions while the economic outputs of emerging economies exert " U” type negative impacts on the carbon emissions of China. The status of international industrial specialization and the structure of commodity exports can largely explain the shock differences of economic growth and carbon emissions between representative economies and China.
A Research on the Structural Characteristics and Transmission Path of the “International Trade-Carbon Emission” Network
Journal of Finance and Economics Vol. 45, Issue 03, pp. 114 - 126 (2019) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.jfe.2019.03.009
 Jiang X M, Liu Y F. Research on the pattern change of carbon emission embodied in international trade and its determinants[J]. Statistical Research, 2013, (9): 29-36. (In Chinese)
 Li J, Chen N, Wan G H, et al. Competitive complementary relationship and dynamic change of national goods trade along “The Belt and Road”: Based on network analysis method[J]. Management World, 2017, (4): 10-19. (In Chinese)
 Liu H J, Liu C M, Sun Y N. Spatial correlation network structure of energy consumption and its effect in China[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2015, (5): 83-95. (In Chinese)
 Niu Y J, Chen W Y, Wu Z X. Construction of global multi-regional CGE model and simulation analysis of carbon leakage[J]. The Journal of Quantitative &Technical Economics, 2012, (11): 34-50. (In Chinese)
 Peng S J, Zhang W C. International trade and climate change issues: A literature review[J]. The Journal of World Economy, 2016, (2): 167-192. (In Chinese)
 Qi Y, Li H M, Xu M. Accounting embodied carbon in import and export in China[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2008, (3): 8-13. (In Chinese)
 Wang M C, Xu K N. Trade openness, economic growth and CO2 emission in China: A GVAR analysis[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2015, (11): 52-58. (In Chinese)
 Wang W J, Xiang Q F. Accounting and responsibility analysis on carbon emissions embodied in international trade[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2011, (10): 56-64. (In Chinese)
 Xu Z Y. Progress in the application of social network analysis in the field of economics[J]. Economics Information, 2013, (10): 61-72. (In Chinese)
 Zhang H, Li Y, Zhang Y. Dynamic impact of China’s economic growth on international energy consumption and carbon emissions: An empirical study based on the GVAR model in 33 countries[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 2014, (1): 14-25. (In Chinese)
 Zhang Y Q. Global VAR model: Theory, methodology and application on the China’s economic analysis[J]. The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics, 2012, (4): 136-149. (In Chinese)
 Antweiler W, Copel B R, Taylor M S. Is free trade good for the environment?[J]. The American Economic Review, 2001, 91(4): 877-908.
 Boschi M, Girardi A. The contribution of domestic, regional and international factors to Latin America’s business cycle[J]. Economic Modelling, 2011, 28(3): 1235-1246.
 Chang P L, Shih H Y. Comparing patterns of intersectoral innovation diffusion in Taiwan and China: A network analysis[J].Technovation, 2005, 25(2): 155-169.
 Coondoo D, Dinda S. Causality between income and emission: A country group-specific econometric analysis[J]. Ecological Economics, 2002, 40(3): 351-367.
 Copel B R, Taylor M S. Trade and transboundary pollution[J]. American Economic Review, 1995, 85(4): 716-737.
 Copel B R, Taylor M S. Free trade and global warming: A trade theory view of the Kyoto protocol[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 2005, 49(2): 205-234.
 Eickmeier S, Ng T. How do US credit supply shocks propagate internationally? A GVAR approach[J]. European Economic Review, 2015, 74(2): 128-145.
 Granger C W J, Jeon Y. Evaluation of global models[J]. Economic Modelling, 2007, 24(6): 980-989.
 Grossman G M, Krueger A B. Environmental impacts of a north American free trade agreement[J]. The Mexico-US Free Trade Agreement, 1993, 8(2): 223-250.
 Holtz-Eakin D, Selden T M. Stoking the fires? CO2emissions and economic growth[J]. Journal of Public Economics, 1992, 57(1): 85-101.
 Jorgenson A K, Clark B. Are the economy and the environment decoupling? A comparative international study, 1960-2005[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 2012, 118(1): 1-44.
 Machado G, Schaeffer R, Worrell E. Energy and carbon embodied in the international trade of Brazil: An input-output approach[J]. Ecological Economics, 2001, 39(3): 409-424.
 Montresor S, Marzetti G V. Applying social network analysis to input-output based innovation matrices: An illustrative application to six OECD technological systems for the middle 1990s[J]. Economic Systems Research, 2009, 21(2): 129-149.
 Pesaran M H, Schuermann T, Weiner S M. Modeling regional interdependencies using a globalerror-correcting macro-econometric model[J]. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 2001, 22(2): 129-162.
 Peters G P, Minx J C, Weber C L, et al.Growth in emission transfers via international trade from 1990 to 2008[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2011, 108(21): 8903-8908.
 Prell C. Wealth and pollution inequalities of global trade: Anetwork and input-output approach[J]. Social Science Journal, 2016, 53(1): 111-121.
 Rauch J E, Watson J. Network intermediaries in international trade[J]. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 2004, 13(1): 69-93.
 Wyckoff A W, Roop J M. The embodiment of carbon in imports of manufactured products: Implications for international agreements on greenhouse gas emissions[J]. Energy Policy, 1994, 22(3): 187-194.
 Zhang X P, Cheng X M. Energy consumption, carbon emissions, and economic growth in China[J]. Ecological Economics, 2009, 68(10): 2706-2712.
Cite this article
Zhang Tongbin, Sun Jing. A Research on the Structural Characteristics and Transmission Path of the “International Trade-Carbon Emission” Network[J]. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2019, 45(3): 114-126.
Previous: How does “Transforming the Economy from Substantial to Fictitious” Spread? Based on the Perspective of Peer Effects