中文摘要：

贸易与环境关系是理解人地关系的重要方面,是“人—地”相互作用复杂性与不确定性的集中体现。国际贸易环境效应研究旨在探究自由贸易和环境保护之间的互补或互斥关系,由此催生了一系列具有关联性和竞争性的理论假说。本文结合全球化过程中全球联系强化、地方力量崛起和国家力量变革等特征,分别从全球联系、国家力量和地方发展3个层面梳理了现有贸易环境效应理论假说和实证研究,指出贸易环境效应是贸易过程（流量变化）与贸易影响（存量累积）共同作用下的结果。建立在比较优势基础上的存量因素包括经济增长、环境规制与地理区位,而贸易与投资一体化的特征则揭示了产业内贸易的重要性。由此,本文发现既有研究更多地建立在比较优势的基础上探讨全球与国家层面的贸易环境效应,表现出“自上而下”的特征,强调环境规制的作用。同时,也存在局限于南北国家关系、对地方化特征关注较少、对贸易政策与环境规制协调机制的理解有待深化等不足。据此,本文提出全球地方化进程中的区域发展分析将为贸易环境效应研究提供有益补充,其作用为：1实现对贸易引致的区域不均衡性的考量;2满足产业内与产业间贸易并存的分析需要;3为协调环境规制与贸易政策提供合宜的尺度。

英文摘要：

Trade-environment relationship is one of the major manifestations of the coupled human-environment system, exhibiting significant complexity and uncertainty. Studies on the environmental effects of trade （EET） seek to explore the complementary or competing relationship between free trade and environment conservation, and give birth to a series of theories and hypotheses. Since globalization has witnessed increasing global-local interactions, this article outlines a framework of global connection, national power, and regional development to review existing studies on EET. It highlights how the process （flows） and the outcome （stocks） of trade work together to generate EET. Based on neo-classical international trade theory, this study identifies three types of stocks, namely location, growth, and regulation. In contrast, the integration of international trade and investment indicates the importance of intra-industry trade. This study shows that existing literature on EET is primarily based on the global and national scale, showing a ＂top-down＂ trend, where the role of environmental regulation stands at the center. However, these studies failed to incorporate the localized factors and neglected the interaction between trade policy and environmental regulation. They are also confined to the ＂north-south＂ trade and cease to follow the changing geography of trade. Accordingly, this article argues that EET studies should pay closer attention to regional development from a ＂glocalization＂ perspective to： （1） consider the expanding trade- induced regional inequality; （2） adapt to the coexistence of intra-and inter-industry trade; and （3） produce a proper scale for the coordination between trade policy and environmental regulation.