Synergistic effect of carbon ETS and carbon tax under China's peak emission target: A dynamic CGE analysis

Zhang, Yongqiang; Qi, Lingli; Lin, Xu; Pan, Haoran; Sharp, Basil

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154076

Cited by 85 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using a national CGE model that incorporates short-run unemployment effects, Bi, Xiao, and Sun (2018) compared the impacts of a single ETS, a single CT, and a combination of an ETS and a CT. Assuming that an ETS will stimulate increased energysaving innovation while a CT will not, their results showed that a mixed system will lead to lower GDP losses than a single carbon pricing, which is similar to the finding in Zhang et al (2022). While most studies use a fixed CT in the analysis, Cao et al (2019) compared the impacts of implementing an ETS and a hybrid system including an ETS and a CT on the national economic costs under the same emissions reduction target at a national level, and the results indicated that the hybrid system would achieve the same CO 2 goals with lower permit prices and GDP losses.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Climate Change Mitigation: Policies and Lessons for Asia

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asia and the Pacific accounts for over 50% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, driven by rapid economic growth and energy consumption in developing countries. Far-reaching efforts are urgently needed to reduce the region’s emissions and realize a 1.5°C temperature drop required to fight climate change and associated threats to sustainable development, particularly in highly polluted cities. Many governments have pledged to meet net-zero carbon emissions by around mid-century, but action to transform energy markets alone will not be enough. Measures to promote the decarbonization of the transport, buildings, agriculture, and other sectors must also be taken forward to successfully achieve emissions reduction targets. Climate Change Mitigation: Policies and Lessons for Asia highlights evidence-based approaches for advancing decarbonization across sectors. It offers timely insights for policy makers and scholars seeking to better understand the region’s climate change mitigation challenges, policy approaches for fostering emissions breakthroughs, and the sustainable development implications.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Climate Change Mitigation: Policies and Lessons for Asia

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rest can refer to the standard CGE model (Zhang, 2017;Lin and Wu, 2021;Zhang et al, 2022). The equations and variables are listed in Supplementary Material.…”

Section: Framework Of the Water Computable General Equilibrium Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the impacts of China’s water resource tax policies: A trade-off between economic development and ecological protection

Xin

Guo

Wang

2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reform of water resource tax policies is an important measure in the process of China’s green economic transformation. Therefore, improving the accuracy of tax policy impact prediction is crucial for policymakers to make correct decisions. This study focused on the water resource tax policies composed of water resource tax and water pollution tax. A water computable general equilibrium (WCGE) model extended from the traditional computable general equilibrium model was proposed to simulate the impacts of policy changes and determine the optimal tax rate range. Water self-purification capacity and agricultural subsidies were first considered in water computable general equilibrium, providing a simulation–evaluation method that could support the analysis of policy alternatives from a more realistic perspective. The results indicated that water resource tax and water pollution tax synergistically promote water conservation and water pollution reduction, and the negative impact on the economy when they are raised together is lighter than that when the tax burden is raised alone. The water resource tax not only has the best water-saving effect but also has the greatest negative impact on the economy. Technological progress has the best effect in reducing water pollution and is also conducive to reducing the adverse impact of tax increases on the economy. Taxation can also improve social welfare, and the optimal tax rate level is the combination that water resource tax is 4 Yuan/m3, and the water pollution tax is in the range of 5.6–8.4 Yuan/pollution equivalent. The results demonstrate the positive role of government in environmental governance and provide a scientific basis for policymakers to adjust the direction of policy reform, strengthen the collaborative design of water tax policies, and select the optimal tax rate level. Also, solutions of water computable general equilibrium could provide in-depth analysis of the trade-offs between violation risk and system benefits and generate more reliable results by reproducing actual situations. Moreover, the water computable general equilibrium model constructed in this study is also applicable to analyze other types of policies.

show abstract

“…The macro-economic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model is valuable for studying this issue, as the model can assess the impact of policy choices in response to the pandemic by identifying the main economic channels for analysing potential impacts on economic activity and carbon emissions ( Hartono et al, 2021 ). Therefore, this paper established a dynamic CGE model for China based on 2018 input–output tables and referred to the method used in Pan (2016) , Zhang et al (2022b) and Liang et al (2022) , to simulate and analyse the effects of COVID-19 and economic recovery initiatives (VAT tax cuts and LPR cuts) on the Chinese economy and carbon emissions. Unlike previous studies of the impact of disasters on the economy and society, our model captures the overall macro-economic impact and environmental mitigation effects of the two recovery policies and policy combination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%