Emissions cap or emissions tax? A multi-sector business cycle analysis

Dissou, Yazid; Karnizova, Lilia

doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2016.05.002

Cited by 102 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, considering that China's responses to carbon tariffs is seldom mentioned in the existing literature, Liang et al [38], Dissou and Karnizova [39], Eyland and Zaccour [40], Dong et al [41], and Qu and Wu [42] compared the different impacts of a carbon tariff and carbon tax, but did not take a carbon tariff as a response policy. However, the researches of Zhu [43] and Jiang [44] are similar to our study.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of U.S. Carbon Tariffs on China’s Foreign Trade and Social Welfare

Zhang

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recursive multisector dynamic computable general equilibrium (DCGE) model simulates the economic impacts of carbon tariffs, as proposed by the USA, ranging from $40/t to $60/t CO2. We examine a carbon tax and export subsidy as response policies to the U.S. carbon tariff, respectively. The dynamic model shows the possible impacts of these policies on China’s economic structure, carbon emissions, and social welfare from 2020 to 2030. Simulations show that a carbon tariff changes the structure of China’s exports and promotes trade diversion from the USA to other countries and regions. A domestic carbon tax and subsidy policy can dampen the adverse impacts of carbon tariffs on trade. A carbon tax shows an effective impact on increasing clean energy use, decreasing the carbon intensity of output, and reducing carbon emissions. A subsidy on exports to the USA reduces the adverse impact of a carbon tariff on China’s social welfare in the short term.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of U.S. Carbon Tariffs on China’s Foreign Trade and Social Welfare

Zhang

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nesse sentido, uma quantidade crescente de trabalhos tem utilizado modelos baseados na teoria RBC, com vistas a responder questões relacionadas ao meio ambiente e aos recursos naturais. A maior parte desses trabalhos está relacionada ao caso da emissão de carbono, dentre os quais pode-se citar Angelopoulos et al (2010), Fischer & Springborn (2012), Heutel (2012) e Dissou et al (2012). Heutel (2012) analisou como políticas ambientais respondem aos ciclos econômicos nos Estados Unidos; o modelo utilizado pelo autor baseia-se na teoria RBC e foi modificado para incluir uma externalidade relativa à emissão de carbono daquele país.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Além do choque de produtividade padrão dos modelos RBC, o qual o autor chamou de "incerteza econômica", foi incluído um segundo choque relativo às variações na relação emissão e produto, que denominou de "incerteza ambiental". Dissou et al (2012) adaptaram modelos RBC para avaliar níveis de poluição comparando diferentes políticas com foco no setor energético. A diferença nesse caso se deve ao fato de os autores proporem o uso de um modelo multissetorial que desagrega a economia em seis setores.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Impactos de choques tecnológicos sobre o uso da terra no Brasil – uma análise por meio de modelos RBC

Bragagnolo

Spolador

2018

Econ. Aplic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este artigoanalisa como choques tecnológicos e políticas restritivas afetam o uso da terra destinada à atividade agrícola no Brasil. No modelo RBC empregado, além dos tradicionais fatores de produção capital e trabalho, incluiu-se a terra como um insumo adicional. A utilização deste fator é restrita pela disponibilidade de novas áreas agricultáveis. Os resultados obtidos explicam a dinâmica dos fatores de produção, em resposta a um choque tecnológico sob diferentes cenários de restrição de terra, e reforçam a necessidade de investimentos em tecnologia para compensar limitações à expansão do uso da terra para a produção agrícola.

show abstract

“…First, both regulator and industry behave strategi- 2 Additionally, quantity regimes may generate less volatility on the macro level [7]. The comparison between price and quantity instruments has been the subject of several contributions which can be roughly classified into two strings of literature: static and dynamic models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Choice of Market Instrument

Atallah¹

2017

TEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a model where both regulator and industry behave strategically to endogenously choose the optimal market instrument. The regulator payoff function includes political gains from investment in abatement and improvement in the provision of the environmental good in addition to the efficient choice of the instrument level. Whereas the industry's objective is to minimize abatement costs. Under plausible conditions, the model suggests that quantity instrument is favorable to the regulator. Also, industry with high cost of abatement has a better incentive to invest in clean technology. Regulator gains from increasing the provision of environmental good and from industry investing in abatement.

show abstract

Emissions cap or emissions tax? A multi-sector business cycle analysis

Cited by 102 publications

References 49 publications

Impacts of U.S. Carbon Tariffs on China’s Foreign Trade and Social Welfare

Impacts of U.S. Carbon Tariffs on China’s Foreign Trade and Social Welfare

Impactos de choques tecnológicos sobre o uso da terra no Brasil – uma análise por meio de modelos RBC

Strategic Choice of Market Instrument

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About