









































Pa
ge

 
1



Pa
ge

 
13

American Journal of   
Environment and Climate (AJEC)

Climate-Smart Goods in Brazil: Trends, Opportunities, and Trade Policy Implications
Ratan Chowdhury1, Tonmoy Chowdhury2*

Volume 4 Issue 1, Year 2025
ISSN: 2832-403X (Online) 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajec.v4i1.3937
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Article Information ABSTRACT

Received: October 24, 2024

Accepted: November 27, 2024

Published: January 23, 2025

This study analyzed Brazil’s Climate-Smart Goods (CSG) trade from 2000 to 2023. While 
Brazil’s overall trade expanded significantly, CSG trade, though growing, remains a small 
fraction. A persistent trade deficit in CSGs indicates a reliance on imported sustainable 
technologies and limited domestic production. Despite fluctuations, CSG trade has shown 
steady growth, suggesting a growing alignment with global sustainability goals. However, 
CSGs constitute a small portion of  Brazil’s overall exports, highlighting untapped potential 
in the domestic CSG sector. These findings suggest that Brazil can enhance its role in the 
global CSG market by implementing policies that foster domestic production and reduce 
import reliance. Such a shift would not only improve Brazil’s trade balance but also contribute 
to its climate objectives and sustainable development goals.

Keywords
Climate Smart Goods, 
Environment, Trade

1 Development Economics, Dhaka School of  Economics, Bangladesh
2 Environmental and Resource Economics Program, Dhaka School of  Economics, Bangladesh
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: bmkinyili@yahoo.com

INTRODUCTION
The urgency to combat climate change and environmental 
degradation has significantly reshaped global economic 
priorities, highlighting the need for sustainable 
development practices across diverse sectors (Begum, 
2020). Within this framework, trade in climate-smart 
goods (CSGs)—products and technologies specifically 
designed to mitigate environmental impacts and enhance 
sustainability—has emerged as a pivotal aspect of  
international trade policy and economic strategy (Mathur, 
2011). CSGs encompass a broad array of  products, 
including renewable energy technologies, pollution 
management equipment, energy-efficient machinery, 
and sustainable agricultural inputs (Dinda, 2011). The 
expansion of  CSG trade holds the potential to reduce 
carbon emissions while simultaneously driving economic 
growth through innovation and increased productivity 
(Saghaian et al., 2020).
Brazil, as one of  the world’s largest emerging economies, 
occupies a unique position in this landscape due to its 
rich natural resources, vast biodiversity, and significant 
contributions to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 
(Baer, 2008). Analyzing Brazil’s CSG trade patterns is 
crucial for understanding the sector’s capacity to support 
the nation’s sustainable development efforts and align 
with international environmental objectives 
The trade structure and policy framework in Brazil are 
evolving amid an increasingly climate-conscious global 
economy (Nassif  et al., 2020). The country’s energy matrix 
is notably sustainable, primarily reliant on hydroelectric 
power and expanding into renewable sources such as 
wind, solar, and bioenergy (Investment guide to Brasil, 
2017). However, Brazil faces complex environmental 
challenges, including deforestation and high levels of  
industrial and agricultural GHG emissions (Ferraz et 
al., 1999). Participation in global CSG trade represents 
a strategic opportunity for Brazil to mitigate these 

environmental impacts, leveraging green technologies 
for both economic advancement and environmental 
preservation (Knoch et al., 2020). Thus, CSG trade offers 
Brazil a dual opportunity: to diminish its carbon footprint 
while securing competitive advantages in the international 
market for sustainable goods.
The global demand for climate-smart goods has surged 
in recent years as nations adopt stringent environmental 
policies and commit to international agreements, such as 
the Paris Agreement (Crowford, 2011). CSG trade has 
rapidly grown, with countries seeking to reduce their 
reliance on traditional, carbon-intensive goods in favor of  
sustainable alternatives (Saghaian et al., 2020). For Brazil, 
the promotion of  CSGs is particularly relevant, as it seeks 
to diversify its export portfolio, reduce dependency on 
primary commodities, and bolster its position within the 
global green economy (Piao et al., 2021). However, despite 
Brazil’s potential as a key player in CSG trade, the existing 
literature reveals a limited exploration of  the drivers and 
barriers influencing CSG trade growth. Furthermore, 
Brazil’s trade policies and regulatory environment may 
facilitate or constrain its ability to fully capitalize on 
CSG opportunities, depending on their alignment with 
international standards and climate-related goals.
This study aims to bridge these gaps by analyzing the 
trends and trade patterns of  CSGs in Brazil, thereby 
providing a comprehensive understanding of  the 
country’s competitive positioning in the global CSG 
market. By examining import and export trends, sectoral 
contributions, and value chain dynamics, this research 
seeks to identify the sectors most engaged in CSG trade, 
the key markets for Brazilian CSG exports, and the 
primary sources of  CSG imports. Understanding these 
patterns is vital for assessing Brazil’s relative strengths and 
weaknesses in CSG trade and determining the alignment 
of  its trade policies with sustainable development goals.
Additionally, the study will analyze the regulatory and 



Pa
ge

 
14

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

policy environment surrounding CSG trade in Brazil, 
evaluating whether current policies facilitate or inhibit 
CSG growth. International experiences indicate that 
regulatory frameworks can either promote the expansion 
of  green technology markets or impose limitations due 
to restrictive tariffs, non-tariff  barriers, or inadequate 
incentives. A key question for Brazil is the extent to 
which its policies align with its climate commitments, as 
this alignment could significantly influence the success of  
integrating CSG trade into its broader economic strategy.
The motivation for this research is twofold. First, an 
analysis of  CSG trade trends in Brazil contributes to 
the literature on sustainable trade by providing empirical 
insights into Brazil’s role and potential within the CSG 
sector. Second, the findings will offer policymakers 
evidence-based insights regarding the ability of  CSGs 
to bolster Brazil’s economic resilience, environmental 
stewardship, and compliance with international climate 
standards. Given the increasing significance of  sustainable 
trade in the global economy, this research presents timely 
insights that can inform Brazil’s trade policy, promote 
technological innovation, and support the transition to a 
low-carbon economy.
Ultimately, this study seeks to enhance our understanding 
of  how CSG trade can advance Brazil’s sustainable 
development objectives, contribute to emissions 
reduction, and improve Brazil’s positioning in the global 
green economy. By identifying the factors that drive or 
inhibit CSG trade growth, this research will illuminate 
strategic choices available to Brazilian policymakers, 
enabling them to leverage CSG trade as a vital instrument 
for sustainable economic development. This work 
will serve as a foundation for further research on the 
impacts of  CSG trade on economic, environmental, 
and social outcomes, thereby contributing to Brazil’s 
evolving narrative as a significant participant in the global 
movement toward a sustainable future.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Climate change has become one of  the most pressing 
issues in contemporary discourse, both at national 
and international levels. Across most climate policy 
discussions, trade is increasingly recognized as a pivotal 
factor influencing climate change dynamics (Dellink 
et al., 2017). While trade drives economic growth and 
prosperity, it also poses environmental challenges due to 
emissions generated in the production, transportation, 
and consumption of  traded goods (Harris et al., 2021). 
Many climate experts contend that a substantial portion 
of  global CO₂ emissions, a key contributor to climate 
change, is attributable to trade-related activities. In 2019, 
China, the United States, India, Japan, and the Russian 
Federation alone accounted for nearly 70% of  global 
CO₂ emissions (Schleicher et al., 2018). However, the 
trade trends in climate-smart goods (CSGs) in major 
economies such as China and India reveal a shift towards 
more sustainable practices, potentially contributing to a 
reduction in emissions (Chowdhury et al., 2018).  

This dual role of  trade—promoting economic growth 
while impacting the environment—has led many 
countries to grapple with balancing economic and 
environmental objectives (Grossman et al., 1994). One 
solution to mitigate the negative environmental effects 
of  trade while sustaining economic growth is to adopt 
environmentally sustainable trade practices (Zhong, 
2023). Expanding the market for climate-smart goods 
(CSGs) can facilitate this balance, as CSGs encompass 
technologies and products that mitigate environmental 
impacts and enhance sustainability (Mathur, 2011). 
Market trends for CSGs suggest that trade in these goods 
is often regionally concentrated. For instance, in the Asia-
Pacific region, CSG export and import volumes have 
increased significantly; in 2002, export and import growth 
rates in the region were 235% and 222%, respectively. In 
contrast, African regional economic communities such 
as COMESA, EAC, and SADC have seen comparatively 
lower growth rates in CSG trade, with higher import 
growth than export growth (UNESCAP, 2011). This trend 
indicates a greater reliance on imported CSGs. Similarly, 
in APEC countries, export growth of  environmental 
goods has outpaced import growth, with an export rate 
of  13.3% compared to an 11.6% import rate (Kuriyama, 
2012). Least developed countries (LDCs) have also 
demonstrated impressive growth in environmental goods 
trade, exceeding global growth rates; in 2007, the global 
growth rate for environmental goods was 13.58%, while 
LDCs experienced a growth rate of  22.80% (Khatun, 
2012).
The literature has widely debated the question of  trade 
liberalization in environmental goods. Several studies 
emphasize that liberalizing trade policy for environmental 
goods could significantly expand these markets, thereby 
benefiting environmental conditions in developing 
countries by promoting cleaner technologies (Zhang, 
2011; Antweiler et al., 2001; Dean, 1999). This perspective 
aligns with the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, 
which posits that economic growth initially leads to 
environmental degradation, but beyond a certain income 
level, cleaner technologies and stronger regulations 
begin to improve environmental quality (Mishra, 2020). 
Proponents of  this view argue that policies should 
both support environmental goods and prohibit 
environmentally harmful goods. Conversely, some 
studies highlight that trade liberalization does not always 
yield positive environmental outcomes, aligning instead 
with the pollution haven hypothesis, which suggests that 
trade liberalization can lead to the relocation of  polluting 
industries to countries with weaker environmental 
regulations (Duy, 2010).
The majority of  existing research has focused on global and 
regional CSG trade trends, with studies examining trade 
dynamics in China, India, and other major economies. 
While the literature on trade trends and patterns in Brazil 
is substantial, to the best of  the researcher’s knowledge, 
no study has specifically addressed the trend and trade 
patterns of  CSGs in Brazil. Therefore, this study aims 



Pa
ge

 
15

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

to fill this gap by analyzing Brazil’s CSG trade trends and 
patterns. This research is expected to provide a deeper 
understanding of  Brazil’s role in sustainable trade and 
its potential contribution to global emissions reduction 
through the expansion of  CSG markets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study relies on data reflecting Brazil’s trade 
performance, specifically focusing on total trade value, 
total export value, and total import value, as well as the 
trade of  climate-smart goods (CSGs) in Brazil, including 
CSG export and import values. The primary sources for 
these data were the UN Comtrade, UNCTAD, and World 
Bank databases. All data observations were recorded 
on an annual basis and measured in thousands of  U.S. 
dollars, ensuring consistency and comparability over time. 
Climate-smart goods were identified at the HS 6-digit 
level, with relevant data for these goods extracted from 
the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database.
To analyze the trade trends of  CSGs in Brazil, the study 
employed descriptive statistical tools, which are well-suited 
for summarizing and visualizing large datasets. Various 

statistical techniques, including tabulation, graphical 
representations, percentages, and ratio analyses, were 
applied to examine the annual changes and comparative 
performance in Brazil’s trade. These techniques facilitated 
a clear understanding of  the extent and composition of  
CSG trade between Brazil and its global trade partners. 
Ultimately, this analytical approach aims to illuminate 
Brazil’s positioning within the CSG market and its 
alignment with global trends in sustainable trade.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Trends of  Trade in Climate Smart Goods in Brazil 
with the Rest of  the World
Brazil, with strong agricultural, manufacturing, and mining 
sectors, became a prominent player in international trade after 
liberalizing its economy in 1988. This shift led to significant 
export growth across most sectors, boosting Brazil’s trade 
balance and enhancing its economic integration.
The table below highlights trends in Brazil’s total trade 
and climate-smart goods trade from 2000 to 2023, 
reflecting the country’s growing role in sustainable trade 
alongside traditional sectors.

Table 1: Total Trade and Trade in Climate-Smart Goods in Brazil (million, USD)
Year Total trade (million,USD) Total CSGs trade (million,USD) Percentage   Share of  CSGs in 

Brazil’s Total Trade
2000 113762.00 2193671.04 1.92829859
2001 116669.00 2302158.53 1.97323927
2002 110162.00 2838707.97 2.57684861
2003 124084.00 2896213.86 2.33407519
2004 163111.00 2719779.35 1.66744079
2005 196157.00 3123048.64 1.59211684
2006 234630.00 3945725.33 1.6816798
2007 287927.00 6023259.59 2.09193983
2008 379686.00 6677086.31 1.75858112
2009 287170.00 3815619.07 1.32869696
2010 393618.00 3460914.60 0.8792572
2011 492372.00 4589350.17 0.93209
2012 475357.00 5942439.52 1.25010035
2013 484826.00 4525499.72 0.9334276
2014 461686.00 4273107.12 0.92554401
2015 367242.00 3733315.83 1.01658193
2016 324774.00 6787453.57 2.08990054
2017 380843.00 9196147.14 2.41468194
2018 424730.00 7431957.43 1.74980751
2019 414289.00 8122633.73 1.96062018
2020 375516.00 7983918.31 2.12611934
2021 515505.00 11729434.01 2.27532885
2022 626381.00 13505410.29 2.15610152
2023 592406.00 13864941.39 2.34044581

Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024



Pa
ge

 
16

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

Table 1 offers a detailed analysis of  Brazil’s total trade and 
trade in climate-smart goods (CSGs) from 2000 to 2023, 
emphasizing the absolute figures and the percentage 
share of  CSGs within Brazil’s trade portfolio. It illustrates 
Brazil’s increasing alignment with global trends in 
sustainable trade, evidenced by the tripling of  total trade 
volume from USD 113.7 billion in 2000 to over USD 626 
billion in 2022 and a parallel rise in CSG trade, peaking at 
USD 13.86 billion in 2023.
The CSG share as a percentage of  total trade, despite 
some fluctuation, generally trends upward, surpassing 

2% in recent years. Notably, increases in the CSG share 
during economic downturns (e.g., 2020) and peaks in 
2021 and 2023 may indicate Brazil’s strategic shift toward 
sustainable sectors amid global climate initiatives. These 
trends suggest that external economic conditions and 
policy shifts are influencing Brazil’s CSG trade dynamics, 
aligning national trade with broader environmental 
objectives. This table, therefore, provides insight into 
the evolution of  Brazil’s trade structure, reflecting the 
growing yet variable role of  CSGs as part of  the country’s 
response to global sustainability goals.

Figure 1: Total Trade & Total CSGs Trade in Brazil (million, USD) for the Study Period
Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024

This line graph depicts the trends in total trade and climate-
smart goods (CSGs) trade from 2000 to 2023, measured 
in millions of  USD. The green line, representing total 
trade, shows a general upward trend with fluctuations, 
indicating variability in trade volumes. Notably, a sharp 
increase occurs around 2020, peaking in 2022, which may 
reflect broader economic or policy influences on trade 
in recent years. The orange line, indicating CSG trade, 
follows a similar growth trend but remains at a lower level 
throughout the period. CSG trade demonstrates more 

consistent growth after 2008, suggesting an increase in the 
prioritization of  climate-smart products, with a marked 
rise in recent years possibly driven by rising demand for 
sustainable goods or supportive policy changes.
Overall, while both total trade and CSG trade have 
expanded significantly, CSG trade remains a smaller 
portion of  total trade, highlighting the gradual yet limited 
incorporation of  climate-smart goods into the broader 
trade framework and underscoring potential areas for 
policy intervention and market growth.

Table 2: Brazil’s Trade Balance with Rest of  the World (million, USD)
Year Overall Trade Balance (million USD) CSGs Trade Balance (million USD)

Export Import Trade balance Export Import Trade balance
2000 55119 58643 -3524 455.172158 1738.49889 -1283.3267
2001 58287 58382 -95 565.589774 1736.56875 -1170.979
  2002 60439 49723 10716 474.588398 2364.11957 -1889.5312
2003 73203 50881 22322 633.964255 2262.2496 -1628.2853
2004 96678 66433 30245 912.335865 1807.44348 -895.10762
2005 118529 77628 40901 1133.46813 1989.58051 -856.11237
2006 137581 97049 40532 1527.73055 2417.99477 -890.26422
2007 159816 128111 31705 2814.27889 3208.9807 -394.70181
2008 195765 183921 11844 2197.5014 4479.58491 -2282.0835
2009 151792 135378 16414 1911.66063 1903.95844 7.702198
2010 200434 193184 7250 1735.33934 1725.57526 9.764082
2011 253666 238706 14960 2290.32593 2299.02424 -8.698308



Pa
ge

 
17

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

This table 2 outlines Brazil’s trade balance with the global 
market from 2000 to 2023, focusing on total trade and 
climate-smart goods (CSGs), measured in millions of  
USD. It details annual exports, imports, and the resultant 
trade balance, calculated as exports minus imports. A 
positive trade balance denotes a surplus, while a negative 
balance reflects a deficit.
From 2002 to 2023, Brazil generally maintained a positive 
overall trade balance, with notable surpluses from 2015 
onwards, reaching a peak in 2023. In contrast, the trade 

balance for CSGs consistently shows a deficit throughout 
the period, indicating that Brazil’s imports of  CSGs 
exceeded exports annually. This deficit has notably 
increased in recent years, exceeding $9 billion in both 
2022 and 2023, suggesting a growing dependence on 
CSG imports.
In summary, while Brazil’s overall trade remains positive, its 
persistent CSG trade deficit highlights a reliance on imported 
climate-smart goods and underscores potential opportunities 
to strengthen domestic production in this sector.

2012 239953 235404 4549 2950.8943 2991.54522 -40.650915
2013 232544 252282 -19738 2244.27738 2281.22235 -36.94497
2014 220923 240763 -19840 2139.3841 2133.72302 5.661078
2015 186782 180460 6322 1897.09024 1836.22559 60.864659
2016 179526 145248 34278 1951.02891 4836.42467 -2885.3958
2017 214988 165855 49133 4413.50737 4782.63977 -369.1324
2018 231890 192840 39050 1856.34144 5575.61599 -3719.2746
2019 221127 193162 27965 1811.91425 6310.71948 -4498.8052
2020 209180 166336 42844 1559.1732 6424.74511 -4865.5719
2021 280815 234690 46125 2038.13579 9691.29822 -7653.1624
2022 334136 292245 41891 1781.56839 11723.8419 -9942.2735
2023 339696 252710 86986 2046.11749 11818.8239 -9772.7064

Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024

Figure 2: Brazil’s Export Values to the Rest of  the World (million USD)
Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024

This line graph compares Brazil’s total exports and 
exports of  climate-smart goods (CSGs) from 2000 to 
2023, in millions of  USD.
The green line, representing total exports, shows a 
general upward trend with fluctuations, highlighting 
growth in Brazil’s overall exports. Notable peaks appear 
in 2011, 2014, and 2023, reflecting significant increases 
in export activity. The orange line, representing CSG 
exports, follows a similar pattern but remains consistently 

lower. Despite fluctuations, including a substantial spike 
in 2017, CSG exports have shown moderate growth in 
recent years.
In summary, both total exports and CSG exports have 
expanded, though CSGs remain a smaller portion of  
overall exports. This suggests an increasing but still 
limited role for climate-smart goods in Brazil’s export 
portfolio, with CSG exports influenced by varying 
demand or supply conditions over time.



Pa
ge

 
18

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

Figure 3: Brazil’s Import Values with the Rest of  the World (million USD)
Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024.

This line graph illustrates trends in Brazil’s total imports 
and climate-smart goods (CSGs) imports from 2000 to 
2023, in millions of  USD.
The purple line, representing total imports, displays an 
overall upward trend with some fluctuations. Notably, 
imports increased between 2005 and 2013, showed 
variability thereafter, and rose sharply from 2020, 
peaking in 2022. The orange line, showing CSG imports, 

consistently remains lower than total imports but follows 
a steady growth pattern. A significant rise begins around 
2015, continuing through 2023, indicating an increased 
demand for climate-smart goods.
In sum, both total imports and CSG imports have 
expanded, with CSG imports representing a smaller but 
gradually increasing share, reflecting Brazil’s growing 
focus on sustainable goods within its import portfolio.

Figure 4: Comparison between Total EX-IM & Total CSGs EX-IM in Brazil (million USD)for the Study Period
Source: Author’s compilation based on World Development Indicators (WDI) of  the World Bank and UN Comtrade data (2010), 
extracted from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) database, accessed in August 2024

A line graph comparing Brazil’s total exports and imports 
(EX-IM) with trade in climate-smart goods (CSGs) 
from 2000 to 2023 would highlight trends in Brazil’s 
overall and sustainable trade sectors. The Total EX-IM 
line reflects fluctuations in general trade, influenced 
by global economic cycles, exchange rates, and trade 
policies, with notable dips during events like the 2008–
2009 financial crisis and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. 
The Total CSGs EX-IM line captures trade in green 
technologies, such as renewable energy and low-carbon 
products, influenced by domestic environmental policies, 

international agreements, and growing global demand for 
sustainable goods.
If  Total EX-IM outpaces CSG EX-IM, it suggests that 
while Brazil’s overall trade expands, CSGs remain a 
smaller segment. Conversely, a narrowing gap indicates a 
shift towards a more sustainable trade portfolio. Sudden 
increases in CSG trade may reflect specific policies or 
international collaborations fostering green industries. 
This graph offers insight into Brazil’s evolving engagement 
with sustainable trade practices in response to global 
environmental initiatives and economic incentives.



Pa
ge

 
19

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

CONCLUSION
Brazil’s trade in climate-smart goods (CSGs) reflects 
a growing, yet underdeveloped, engagement with 
sustainable trade practices. From 2000 to 2023, Brazil’s 
total trade expanded significantly, with CSG trade 
following a generally upward trend, though consistently 
representing a small fraction of  overall trade. The 
persistent trade deficit in CSGs underscores Brazil’s 
dependence on imports for sustainable technologies, 
which suggests that the domestic CSG production sector 
has not kept pace with the rising demand. Despite this, 
the steady growth of  CSG imports and exports highlights 
Brazil’s increasing alignment with global sustainability 
goals, spurred by the global demand for environmentally 
friendly goods and Brazil’s commitments to international 
climate accords.
However, CSG trade remains relatively limited within 
Brazil’s broader export portfolio, signaling an area of  
untapped potential. The current trade pattern reflects 
Brazil’s substantial import reliance and emphasizes the 
need for policies that can strengthen local production 
capabilities. Addressing this will be essential for Brazil to 
not only reduce its CSG trade deficit but also position 
itself  as a competitive supplier in the global green 
market. This alignment could yield economic benefits 
while also supporting Brazil’s climate objectives, making 
sustainable trade a dual engine for economic growth and 
environmental stewardship.
 
REFERENCES
Antweiler, W., Copeland, B., & Taylor, M. S. (1998). Is free 

trade good for the environment? American Economic 
Review, 91(4), 877–908.

Baer, W. (2008). The Brazilian economy: Growth and development 
(6th ed.). Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Begum, M. (2020). The impact of  foreign direct investment 
inflows on sustainable development: Evidence from an emerging 
middle-income economy [Doctoral dissertation, Western 
Sydney University] 

Chowdhury, T., & Islam, N. (2018). China’ trade in climate 
smart goods: an analysis of  trend and trading pattern. 
Environmental Economics, 9(3), 17-28.

Crowford, J. (2011). Promoting trade and investment 
in climate-smart goods, services, and technologies 
in Asia and the Pacific. United Nations Economic and 
Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. https://www.
unescap.org/sites/default/files/4.%2520Promoting-
Trade-and-Investment-in-Climate-Smart-Goods-
Services-and-Technologies-in-Asia-and-the-Pacific.
pdf  

Dean, J. M. (1999). Does trade liberalization harm 
the environment? A new test. SAIS, Johns Hopkins 
University. Washington, D.C. https://documents1.
worldbank.org/curated/en/361161468761682688/8
20140748_2004041311100438/additional/28158.pdf  

Dellink, R., Hwang, H., Lanzi, E., & Chateau, J. (2017). 
International trade consequences of  climate 
change. OECD Trade and Environment Working Paper 

2017/01. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/
api/core/bitstreams/bdec39f0-159a-43dd-9eee-
1b8905b08ba9/content  

Dinda, S. (2011). Climate change and development: Trade 
opportunities of  climate-smart goods and technologies in 
Asia. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/34883/1/
MPRA_paper_34883.pdf

Duy, N. L. (2010). The impact of  trade liberalization on 
the environment in some East Asian countries: An 
empirical study. CARE 2260 EMR, Faculty of  Laws, 
Economics and Management, University of  Rouen. https://
ceauk.org.uk/2010-conference-papers/full-papers/
Nguyen-Duy-Loi-CEA-Final.pdf  

Ferraz, C., & Young, C. E. F. (1999). Trade liberalization 
and industrial pollution in Brazil. https://repositorio.
cepal.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/bbe522be-
f8b5-41a2-9db8-cff7ec4de200/content

Grossman, G. M., & Krueger, A. B. (1994). Economic 
growth and the environment. Working Paper No. 
4634. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_
papers/w4634/w4634.pdf  

Harries, J. M., & Roach, B. (2021). Environmental and natural 
resource economics (5th ed.). Taylor & Francis Group.

Investment Guide to Brazil 2017. (2017). ApexBrasil. 
h t t p : / / w w w. a p e x b r a s i l . c o m . b r / u p l o a d s /
Investment%20Guide%202017.pdf

Khatun, F. (2012). Trade in environmental goods by least 
developed countries: Issues for negotiations. South 
Asia Economic Journal, 13(2), 157–182.

Knoch, M., & Plasken, C. D. V. (2020). The green finance 
market emerging in Brazil. GIZ. https://www.giz.de/
en/downloads/the-green-finance-market-emerging-
in-brazil-oct-2020-final.pdf

Kuriyama, C. (2012). A snapshot of  current trade trends 
in potential environmental goods and services. APEC 
Policy Support Unit, Policy Brief  No. 3. https://www.
apec.org/docs/default-source/publications/2012/4/
a-snapshot-of-current-trade-trends-in-potential-
environmental-goods-and-services/2012_psu_
policy-brief_issue3-r.pdf?sfvrsn=c25e4b0f_1 

Mathur, S. K. (2011). Trade analysis of  CSG sub-categories 
for regional groups and some selected member states 
of  ESCAP in 2002–2008. Ovidus University Annals, 
Economic Science Series, 11(1), 1264–1279.

Mishra, M. M. (2020). The Kuznets curve for sustainable 
environment and economic growth. Econ Working 
Paper. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/216734  

Nassif, A., & Castilho, M. (2020). Trade patterns in 
a globalized world: Brazil as a case of  regressive 
specialization. Cambridge Journal of  Economics, 1(32). 
https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bez069

Piao, B. S., Silva, V. L., Aguila, I. N. D., & Jimenez, J. D. 
B. (2021). Green growth and agriculture in Brazil. 
Sustainability, 13(1162), 1–13. http://www.apexbrasil.
com.br/uploads/Investment%20Guide%202017.pdf

Saghaian, S., Aghasfari, H., Aminizaden, M., & Riahi, A. 
(2020). Factors influencing climate-smart goods trade 
in some developing countries in the Middle East and 



Pa
ge

 
20

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajec

Am. J. Environ. Clim. 4(1) 13-20, 2025

North Africa Region: An application of  the spatial 
panel model. International Trade Journal, 34(3), 281–296.

Sankar, U. (2006). Trade liberalization and environmental 
protection: Responses of  the leather industry in 
Brazil, China, and India. Economic and Political Weekly, 
41(24), 2470–2477.

Schleicher, J., Schaafsma, M., & Vira, B. (2018). Will 
the sustainable development goals address the links 
between poverty and the natural environment? 
Environmental Sustainability, 34, 43–47. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.09.004   
Zhang, Z. X. (2011). Trade in environmental goods, with 

a focus on climate-friendly goods and technologies. 
East-West Centre Working Papers, Economic Series No. 
120. https://shorturl.at/8pfaK

Zhong, T. (2023). Sustainable international trade: 
Achieving a balance between economic growth and 
environmental responsibility. Frontiers in Business, 
Economics and Management, 12(2), 7–10.


