国内和边境二氧化碳定价对德国收入群体的分配影响

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Resource and Energy Economics Pub Date : 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2024.101435
Michael Hübler , Malin Wiese , Marius Braun , Johannes Damster
{"title":"国内和边境二氧化碳定价对德国收入群体的分配影响","authors":"Michael Hübler ,&nbsp;Malin Wiese ,&nbsp;Marius Braun ,&nbsp;Johannes Damster","doi":"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2024.101435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>While climate policy studies are widespread, fully fledged computable general equilibrium (CGE) model analyses of distributional policy effects are challenging because the required data and approaches are not directly available. To ease such distributional analyses, we provide a step-by-step “recipe” for disaggregating a country-specific representative consumer of a CGE model. Using this “recipe”, we implement German household survey data in a global CGE model by distinguishing three income groups of the German representative consumer. We find that the negative consumption effect of CO<span><math><msub><mrow></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> pricing is highest for the low-income group, whereas the negative income effect is highest for the high-income group and exceeds the consumption effect. The low-income group benefits most from (per capita-based redistribution of) carbon pricing revenues and receives social transfers such that poor households can be better off with such climate policies than without them. CO<span><math><msub><mrow></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> pricing of imports at the (EU) border slightly strengthens these distributional effects and is mainly beneficial for the low-income group. The geographic extension of emissions trading within a “climate club” leads to substantial efficiency gains that are beneficial for Germany and the EU.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47952,"journal":{"name":"Resource and Energy Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000113/pdfft?md5=0507c63903c313654d538e3f4aae24f5&pid=1-s2.0-S0928765524000113-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The distributional effects of CO2 pricing at home and at the border on German income groups\",\"authors\":\"Michael Hübler ,&nbsp;Malin Wiese ,&nbsp;Marius Braun ,&nbsp;Johannes Damster\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.reseneeco.2024.101435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>While climate policy studies are widespread, fully fledged computable general equilibrium (CGE) model analyses of distributional policy effects are challenging because the required data and approaches are not directly available. To ease such distributional analyses, we provide a step-by-step “recipe” for disaggregating a country-specific representative consumer of a CGE model. Using this “recipe”, we implement German household survey data in a global CGE model by distinguishing three income groups of the German representative consumer. We find that the negative consumption effect of CO<span><math><msub><mrow></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> pricing is highest for the low-income group, whereas the negative income effect is highest for the high-income group and exceeds the consumption effect. The low-income group benefits most from (per capita-based redistribution of) carbon pricing revenues and receives social transfers such that poor households can be better off with such climate policies than without them. CO<span><math><msub><mrow></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msub></math></span> pricing of imports at the (EU) border slightly strengthens these distributional effects and is mainly beneficial for the low-income group. The geographic extension of emissions trading within a “climate club” leads to substantial efficiency gains that are beneficial for Germany and the EU.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resource and Energy Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000113/pdfft?md5=0507c63903c313654d538e3f4aae24f5&pid=1-s2.0-S0928765524000113-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resource and Energy Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000113\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resource and Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765524000113","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然气候政策研究十分普遍,但由于所需数据和方法无法直接获得,因此对分配政策效应进行全面的可计算一般均衡(CGE)模型分析具有挑战性。为了简化此类分配分析,我们提供了一个逐步分解 CGE 模型中特定国家代表性消费者的 "方法"。利用这一 "秘诀",我们在全球 CGE 模型中使用了德国家庭调查数据,将德国代表性消费者分为三个收入组。我们发现,二氧化碳定价对低收入群体的负面消费影响最大,而对高收入群体的负面收入影响最大,并且超过了消费影响。低收入群体从(按人均计算的)碳定价收入再分配中获益最多,他们还能得到社会转移支付,因此有这种气候政策的贫困家庭会比没有这种政策的贫困家庭生活得更好。在(欧盟)边境对进口产品进行二氧化碳定价会略微加强这些分配效应,并主要使低收入群体受益。在 "气候俱乐部 "内扩大排放权交易的地域范围可带来巨大的效率收益,这对德国和欧盟都有利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The distributional effects of CO2 pricing at home and at the border on German income groups

While climate policy studies are widespread, fully fledged computable general equilibrium (CGE) model analyses of distributional policy effects are challenging because the required data and approaches are not directly available. To ease such distributional analyses, we provide a step-by-step “recipe” for disaggregating a country-specific representative consumer of a CGE model. Using this “recipe”, we implement German household survey data in a global CGE model by distinguishing three income groups of the German representative consumer. We find that the negative consumption effect of CO2 pricing is highest for the low-income group, whereas the negative income effect is highest for the high-income group and exceeds the consumption effect. The low-income group benefits most from (per capita-based redistribution of) carbon pricing revenues and receives social transfers such that poor households can be better off with such climate policies than without them. CO2 pricing of imports at the (EU) border slightly strengthens these distributional effects and is mainly beneficial for the low-income group. The geographic extension of emissions trading within a “climate club” leads to substantial efficiency gains that are beneficial for Germany and the EU.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Resource and Energy Economics provides a forum for high level economic analysis of utilization and development of the earth natural resources. The subject matter encompasses questions of optimal production and consumption affecting energy, minerals, land, air and water, and includes analysis of firm and industry behavior, environmental issues and public policies. Implications for both developed and developing countries are of concern. The journal publishes high quality papers for an international audience. Innovative energy, resource and environmental analyses, including theoretical models and empirical studies are appropriate for publication in Resource and Energy Economics.
期刊最新文献
Optimal fisheries management and the response to price changes Editorial Board International emissions trading and the distribution of capital Learning and uncertainty in spatial resource management The intrinsic value of decision rights: Field evidence from electricity contract choice automation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1