A Social Accounting Matrix for India, 2005-06

Pradhan, Basanta K.; Saluja, Manoj; Parida, Yashobanta

doi:10.5296/rae.v6i1.4528

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, two single-country CGE models are applied: CEEPA (China Energy and Environmental Policy Analysis) describes the Chinese economy (Liang et al 2007 ; Liang and Wei 2012 ), based on input-output data of the National Bureau of Statistics PR China ( 2009 ). IEG-CGE (Institute of Economic Growth-CGE) describes the Indian economy (Pradhan and Ghosh 2012a , b ) and is based on a social accounting matrix (Ojha et al 2009 ; Pradhan et al 2006 ). The single country models capture characteristics of the labor and energy markets of the respective countries.…”

Section: Modeling Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-model comparison of the economic and energy implications for China and India in an international climate regime

Johansson

Lucas

Weitzel

et al. 2014

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a modeling comparison on how stabilization of global climate change at about 2 °C above the pre-industrial level could affect economic and energy systems development in China and India. Seven General Equilibrium (CGE) and energy system models on either the global or national scale are soft-linked and harmonized with respect to population and economic assumptions. We simulate a climate regime, based on long-term convergence of per capita carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, starting from the emission pledges presented in the Copenhagen Accord to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and allowing full emissions trading between countries. Under the climate regime, Indian emission allowances are allowed to grow more than the Chinese allowances, due to the per capita convergence rule and the higher population growth in India. Economic and energy implications not only differ among the two countries, but also across model types. Decreased energy intensity is the most important abatement approach in the CGE models, while decreased carbon intensity is most important in the energy system models. The reduction in carbon intensity is mostly achieved through deployment of carbon capture and storage, renewable energy sources and nuclear energy. The economic impacts are generally higher in China than in India, due to higher 2010–2050 cumulative abatement in China and the fact that India can offset more of its abatement cost though international emission trading.

show abstract

Section: Modeling Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-model comparison of the economic and energy implications for China and India in an international climate regime

Johansson

Lucas

Weitzel

et al. 2014

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SAM for 2007-08 consists of 78 sectors, 2 factors of production (namely, labour and capital), 9 household categories based on occupation and 7 economic agents, namely households, private corporations, public enterprises, government, indirect taxes, investment (i.e., capital account) and the ROW. This SAM was constructed for the Planning Commission (Pradhan et al, 2013).…”

Section: Sam For Indiamentioning

confidence: 99%