贸易不仅是物质的交换，也是生态资源和环境的交换。从1994年汇率改革开始，中国的贸易额一直保持飞速的增长态势，外贸总额由1994年的2366亿美元上升到2007年的21737亿美元，贸易顺差由1994年的53亿美元上升到2007年的2618亿美元，贸易顺差占GDP的比重由1994年的不到1%上升到2007年的8.08%。贸易在中国的经济发展中发挥了极其重要的作用，但在大量“中国制造”走向世界的同时，中国也付出了高昂的环境代价。生态经济学研究表明，只用货币形式来评价国际贸易是相当片面的，看似等价交换的贸易背后，存在生态环境的不对等交换。评价贸易的可持续发展程度需要考虑贸易中所消耗的资源以及其环境代价。中国是世界上温室气体排放量增速最快的国家，2006年全国的温室气体排放量达到了1990年排放量的2.6倍。不久后中国将成为世界上最大的温室气体排放国，中国正承受着越来越大的国际减排压力。为了全面认识中国的碳排放状况，有必要对进出口商品生产过程中所排放的温室气体展开研究。同时，在中国应对气候变化的减排措施中，贸易也必须作为一个关键要素来考虑。2007年以来，在相关的国际气候谈判中，中国政府主张由产品消费国承担产品生产过程中的温室气体排放责任；以美国为代表的发达国家却认为发展中国家的“环境倾销”损害了其国内产品的竞争力，拟对来自未采取减排行动国家的能源密集型产品征收气候变化税。中国贸易产品生产过程中的碳排放，正成为我国减轻排放压力和发达国家通过贸易向我国施加压力的双重工具。在相关的国际气候谈判中，我国必须在这两者之间进行权衡。本文以2002年中国投入产出表和全球贸易分析项目数据库中各国的投入产出表为基础，结合相关贸易统计，用投入产出法计算了1997-2007年中国进出口贸易中的隐含碳。在此基础上，分析了贸易对我国碳排放的影响，隐含碳进出口的商品结构，提出了我国应对碳排放增长应采取的贸易措施。从国际谈判的角度，分析了生产法、消费法、以及生产者消费者责任共享法核算对我国温室气体排放量的影响，分析了气候变化税的目的、与WTO的关系，以及对我国贸易可能产生的影响，进而提出了贸易中隐含碳问题上，我国在相关气候谈判中应采取的策略。最后，从理论上分析了生态不对等贸易存在的理由，对全球碳排放的影响，探讨了生态不对等贸易的解决方案。本文的主要研究结果如下：1、1997-2007年，中国进出口贸易中的隐含碳均有所上升，但隐含碳出口量大于隐含碳进口量，我国是一个隐含碳净出口国。1997-2007年每年隐含碳净出口量占当年排放总量的比例平均在10%左右。2、出口促进了我国碳排放的增长。在不计算隐含碳出口的情况下，我国的碳排放总量将大幅降低，1997-2007年碳排放平均增长率将由7.82%下降到4.39%。进口产品减少了我国的碳排放，我国通过进口所节约的碳排放大于实际的隐含碳进口量。但总体看来，我国产品出口中消耗的碳排放大于通过产品进口所节约的碳排放，1997-2007年平均每年差值为7千万吨碳当量。3、贸易规模的扩大是隐含碳进出口扩大的主要因素，高能耗产品在进出口中比例的上升使贸易产品的结构趋向高碳化，对隐含碳进出口的增长具有促进作用。4、为了应对隐含碳出口量的高速增长，我国需要改变出口导向的贸易政策，同时加大贸易结构的调整力度，对钢铁、焦炭、有色金属、肥料等高能耗高排放产品取消出口退税并征收一定的出口关税。除此之外，国内其它减排措施，如提高能效、使用可再生能源等，对隐含碳出口量的降低也具有一定的积极意义。5、以消费法核算各国温室气体排放量在一定程度上能减轻我国的减排压力。消费法和现有的核算方法相比，1997-2007年我国的排放量可将低10%左右，但提倡消费法核算各国碳排放量容易滋生贸易保护主义。6、受WTO环境规则的制约，美国提出的气候变化税并不容易实现，但如果以消费法核算各国温室气体排放量，气候变化税的WTO障碍将有所降低，美国以减少其消费量为由对高排放产品征收气候变化税的理由将变得比较充分。气候变化税一旦实施，我国对美出口的大部分产品将受到影响，从而影响到国内经济发展。7、在国际相关谈判中，我国应以隐含碳为筹码，在当前的温室气体核算框架下争取更多的碳排放权，而不是推行以消费法为基础的温室气体排放核算。同时，为了抵制气候变化税，我国应积极宣传我国应对气候变化的成就。就中美而言，我国在应对气候变化方面的减排措施完全可以与美国相比较。8、以比较优势为基础的国际贸易提高了全球产品产量，提高了各国福利，但却降低了能源使用效率，促进了全球碳排放的额外增长。9、环境成本内在化、技术转移有助于全球能源利用效率的提高，但无法改变发展中国家与发达国家的生态不对等贸易。发展中国家要想摆脱生态不对等贸易，必须依靠自主创新，将产业链低端的比较优势发展为产业链高端的竞争优势。

International trade is not only about exchange of materials, but also about bartering ecological resources and environments. Since 1994 when the exchange rate reformed, China’s trade volume has maintained rapid growth. The trade volume had risen to 2173.7 billion dollars in 2007 from 236.6 billion dollars in 1994, and the trade surplus had risen to 261.8 billion dollars in 2007 from 5.3 billion dollars in 1994. The share of trade surplus on GDP had risen to 8.08% in 2007 from less than 1% in 1994. International trade has played an important role in China’s economic development, but when a large amount of goods “Made in China” is exported to world, China has also paid high environmental costs. The study of ecological economics has showed that it is quite unilateral to evaluate the international trade from monetary term. The trade appears to be equal exchange from monetary perspective, but it may be unequal in terms of ecological resources and environments. When evaluating whether the trade is sustainable, it is necessary to consider ecological resources and environments which were consumed in the process of producing trade commodities.China’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emission has grown most rapidly in the world. China’s GHG emission in 2006 reached to 2.6 times of that in 1990. China will soon become the world’s largest emitter. China is now under increasing pressure of emissions reduction from the international communities. In order to fully understand the situation of China's carbon emissions, it is necessary to study those emissions embodied in the international trade. At the same time, trade also must be considered when implementing domestic GHG reduction measures.Since 2007, China has argued that consumper nations should take responsibility for emission embodied in traded commodities. But the developed countries represented by the USA argued that “environmental dumping” from developing countries damaged their domestic competitiveness, and planned to impose “climate change tariff” on energy intensive products from those nations which don’t take action of GHG reduction. In the relevant international climate negotiations, China must find a balance between GHG emission right and trade benefit.Based on China’s input-output table in 2002 and main import nations’ input-output table in 2001 which were provided in global trade analysis project, combined with China’s trade statistics, this paper calculated carbon emissions embodied in China’s international trade from 1997-2007 based on input-output analysis. Impact of international trade on China’s carbon emissions, structure of commodities which were imported or exported was analyzed. The paper proposed trade-related measures of reducing domestic emissions. From the perspective of international climate change negotiations, this paper also studied impacts of different GHG emissions accountings on China’s carbon emissions, and possible impacts of climate change tariff on China’s international trade. Then some strategies for China in climate change negotiation were proposed as a result. Finally, this paper discussed why the ecological unequal trade could continue, its impact on global environment, and how to eliminate ecological unequal trade. The main research results are included:1. Carbon embodied in export was greater than that embodied in import. Thus, China is a net export nation in embodied carbon. The average share of net export on domestic emissions is about 10%.2. Export promoted the increasing of China’s domestic carbon emissions. China’s carbon emissions will be lower, and its average increasing rate will drop to 4.39% from 7.82% in 1997-2007 when carbon embodied in export isn’t accounted. China lessened some carbon emissions by import, and the amount is greater than actual carbon embodied in import. Overall, carbon emissions embodied in export is greater than avoided emissions by import, and the average surplus is about 70 MtC (Million Tons Carbon equilvalent) in 1997-2007.3. The main factor for the increase of carbon embodied in import and export in 1997-2007 is the volume expansion of trade. The increase of share of energy intensive products on trade makes the structure of trade commodities carbon-intensive, which promotes increasing of carbon embodied in trade.4. In order to respond to the rapid growth of domestic carbon emissions, China should adjust its export-oriented economic policy, eliminate export tax rebate or impose export tariff for energy intensive products such as irons, cokes, non ferrous metals and fertilizers. Moreover, other non trade-related measures of emissions reduction such as energy efficiency improving, clean energy using et al, can also decrease carbon emissions embodied in export.5. China’s carbon emissions will be about 10% lower than current accounting when the greenhouse gas emissions are accounted based on consumer responsibility method. Through consumer-based emissions accounting, China may alleviate the emissions reduction pressure, but this accounting may breed ground for trade protectionism.6. Climate change tariff cannot be imposed easily under current WTO environmental rules, but once consumer-based emissions accounting is implemented, the barrier of climate change tariff from WTO rules will be eased. Under that circumstance, imposing climate change tariff would be justified because those nations need to reduce their emissions. Once climate change tariff is imposed, a majority of China’s export commodities would be affected, which is adverse to China economic growth.7. China should fight for more greenhouse gas emission rights based on the reason of exported and exporting a huge amount of embodied carbon. It is unwise to advocate consumer-based emissions accounting in climate change negotiations. China should publicize its achievements in addressing climate change actively. China’s emissions reduction measures and effects are comparative to that of USA.8. International trade based on comparative advantage may improve the outputs of global products and the welfares of trade countries, but it may reduce the global energy efficiency, and promote extra increasing of global carbon emissions.9. Both internalization of environmental costs and technology transfer are beneficial to global energy efficiency improvement, but they are not helpful to eliminate ecological unequal trade. In order to eliminate ecological unequal trade, developing countries must improve their capabilities of innovation, and transform their comparative advantage in low-end industries to high-end ones in the global industrial chains.