how to understand this sentence.

Inevitably, trade-offs are made----such as a lowering of mandated auto pollution standards for the immediate future against a raising of overall air quality requirement.

Let's say "a lowering of mandated auto pollution standards" is A and "a raising of overall air quality requirement" is B.

I understand that there is a compromise between A and B, but which one wins the upper hand? or the sentence does not suggest that (only telling us that an example of the trade-offs is the compromise between A and B)?