研究表明,试图以“边境税收调整措施”或者“反倾销税”、“反补贴税”为名实施的气候变化边境措施,与现行的WTO规则很可能存在冲突。边境措施若想获得WTO体制的认同,就需要WTO在涉及与产品无关的PPMs、环境政策差异以及管制成本差异等问题上作出根本性调整。这超越了WTO作为一个贸易组织的功能定位,不符合WTO的理论基础,短期来看,也无法通过谈判实现成员方的利益协调。而通过DSB来实现突破也注定不易。DSB的自由裁量权不仅受到WTO成员之间现有利益共识的约束,也将面临裁判过程中的诸多实际困难。结合边境措施的最新发展动向,我国在应对这一问题时可根据自身利益需求,灵活选择碳定价制度和碳规制手段,同时对WTO之外的各种双多边机制的发展保持警惕。 Research shows that climate change border measures that attempt to be implemented in the name of “border tax adjustment measures” or “anti-dumping duties” and “anti-subsidy taxes” are likely to conflict with the current WTO rules. For border measures to gain recognition of the WTO system, it is necessary for the WTO to make fundamental adjustments on such issues as product-related PPMs, environmental policy differences and differences in control costs. This goes beyond the functional orientation of the WTO as a trade organization and does not accord with the theoretical foundation of the WTO. In the short term, it is impossible to achieve the coordination of the interests of the member sides through negotiation. And through the DSB to achieve a breakthrough also doomed. The DSB’s discretion is not only bound by the consensus of existing interests among WTO members, but also faces many practical difficulties in the adjudication process. Combining with the latest developments of border measures, China can flexibly choose carbon pricing and carbon regulatory measures according to its own interests while coping with this issue. Meanwhile, China should remain vigilant against the development of various bilateral and multilateral mechanisms outside the WTO.