The impact of the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism on the global iron and steel trade and emission reduction

The European Council completed the legislative procedure to establish the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) on April 25, 2023, which will be launched in 2027. The iron and steel sector is the main target of the forthcoming CBAM due to the industry's energy-intensive consumption with high carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. However, minimal existing research has been conducted in this regard. This study employs GTAP-e 11.0 and TOPSIS models to estimate the effects of CBAM implementation on the major nations around the world from 2027 to 2030, examining countries' GDP, social welfare, iron and steel production, trade balance, and CO2 emissions to the global environment. This study concludes: (1) The GDP and social welfare of important iron and steel trade partners throughout the world will be significantly impacted by the application of CBAM. Most nations, including those in the EU, will experience negative GDP effects, with China undergoing the most pronounced social welfare declines followed by India. In contrast, the EU27 will benefit the most in terms of social welfare, followed by the US, Japan, and Russia. (2) Iron and steel production will decrease in all countries outside the EU, but it will have a positive impact on the trade balance of most countries. (3) The CO2 emissions of all countries except for the EU and Japan will decrease, with a positive impact on preventing carbon leakage in the international iron and steel trade. (4) Comprehensive analysis demonstrates that the EU will benefit the most, and China will suffer the most from CBAM application. Based on the above conclusions, this study proposes corresponding policy recommendations.

Determinants of Vietnamese footwear exporting firms' market selection: A multinomial logistic analysis of panel data

The literature on export activities is dominated by studies on the determinants of export performance, we contribute to this literature by investigating the determinants of selection of markets by using panel data of Vietnam's footwear firms for the 2006-2010 period. Since no variance was found between firms, a pooled multinomial logit model is consequently preferable. Among the notable results, export value shows a positive correlation with footwear firms serving the US and EU markets. Although Vietnamese footwear firms are less likely to export to the ASEAN countries, they tend to focus on diversifying their products in this market. Both private and FDI firms are less likely to export to the EU compared with their state-owned counterparts (SOEs). However, private firms outperform SOEs in the U.S market.

Migrants' decision-process shaping work destination choice: the case of long-term care work in the United Kingdom and Norway

Escalating demands for formal long-term care (LTC) result in the reliance on migrant workers in many developed countries. Within Europe, this is currently framed by progressive European immigration policies favouring inter-European mobility. Using the UK and Norway as case studies, this article has two main aims: (1) to document changes in the contribution of European Union (EU) migrants to the LTC sectors in Western Europe, and (2) to gain further understanding of migrants’ decision-processes relating to destination and work choices. The UK and Norway provide examples of two European countries with different immigration histories, welfare regimes, labour market characteristics and cultural values, offering a rich comparison platform. The analysis utilizes national workforce datasets and data obtained from migrants working in the LTC sector in the UK and Norway (n = 248) and other stakeholders (n = 136). The analysis establishes a significant increase in the contribution of EU migrants (particularly from Eastern Europe) to the LTC sector in both the UK and Norway despite their different welfare regimes. The findings also highlight how migrant care workers develop rational decision-processes influenced by subjective perspectives of investments and returns within a context of wider structural migration barriers. The latter includes welfare and social care policies framing the conditions for migrants’ individual actions.