• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Energy economics >Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO_2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting
【24h】

Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO_2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting

机译：气候政策背景下的边境税调整：CO_2与目标广泛的温室气体排放目标

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Using a multi-region, multi-sector computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, this paper compares the efficiency, distributional and emission leakage effects of border tax adjustments (BTAs) as part of unilateral climate policies that are based on carbon dioxide (CO_2)-only versus those based on all greenhouse gases (GHGs). Simulation results suggest that the broad-based GHG policies in general have lower efficiency costs and result in less re-distributive effects. BTAs bring modest efficiency gains with adverse distributional consequences. The distributional impacts are smaller under broad-based GHG policies compared to that based on CO_2 only. However, these are due to a wider variety of abatement options under multi-gas policies rather than the BTAs per se. The main difference between the two policies is distributional effects. First, CO_2-only based policies have worse impacts on fossil fuel exporters such as Russia and relatively better outcomes for oil importers such as India and China, compared to that of multi-gas policies particularly when it involves large global emission reduction. Second, sectoral coverage under BTAs also influences the differential outcomes. For example, Brazil is worse impacted under GHG-based policies if agriculture is brought under BTAs as two-third of its emissions are non-CO_2 based and agriculture is the primary source of these emissions.
机译：本文使用多区域，多部门的可计算一般均衡（CGE）模型，比较了作为基于二氧化碳（CO_2）的单边气候政策一部分的边境税调整（BTA）的效率，分布和排放泄漏效应-仅与基于所有温室气体（GHG）的那些相比。模拟结果表明，基础广泛的温室气体政策通常具有较低的效率成本，并导致较少的再分配效应。 BTA带来了适度的效率提升，并对分配产生不利影响。与仅基于CO_2的情况相比，在广泛的GHG政策下的分配影响较小。但是，这是由于多种气体政策下的减排选择范围更大，而不是由于BTA本身。两种政策之间的主要区别在于分配效应。首先，与多气政策相比，基于CO_2的政策对俄罗斯等化石燃料出口国的影响更糟，对印度和中国等石油进口国的效果相对较好，尤其是在涉及全球减排量较大的情况下。其次，BTA下的行业覆盖面也会影响不同的结果。例如，如果将农业纳入BTA协议，巴西将受到基于温室气体的政策的更严重影响，因为其三分之二的排放是基于非CO_2的，而农业是这些排放的主要来源。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Energy economics》 |2012年第2期|154-167|共14页
  • 作者

    Madanmohan Ghosh; Deming Luo; Muhammad Shahid Siddiqui; Yunfa Zhu;

  • 作者单位

    Analysis and Modeling Division, Strategic Policy Branch (SPB), Environment Canada, 10 Wellington Street, Gatineau, Quebec, Canada K1A OH3;

    Analysis and Modeling Division, Environment Canada, Canada;

    Analysis and Modeling Division, Environment Canada, Canada;

    Analysis and Modeling Division, Environment Canada, Canada;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    carbon leakage; border tax adjustments (BRAs); competitiveness;

    机译：碳泄漏边境税调整（BRAs）;竞争力;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号