2019年南非碳税:对建筑材料相对成本、福利、排放和家庭能源消耗的影响

IF 0.6 Q4 MANAGEMENT Acta Structilia Pub Date : 2022-11-30 DOI:10.18820/24150487/as29i2.6
Emmanuel Kabundu, Sijekula Mbanga, P.L.K. Makasa
{"title":"2019年南非碳税:对建筑材料相对成本、福利、排放和家庭能源消耗的影响","authors":"Emmanuel Kabundu, Sijekula Mbanga, P.L.K. Makasa","doi":"10.18820/24150487/as29i2.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The introduction of the carbon tax by South Africa was primarily aimed at reducing pollution, and possibly improving the welfare of South African households. One of the ways of reducing pollution in the construction industry is to discourage the use of building materials that are high carbon emitters or have high energy intensities. This article used the Input-Output (IO) method and sensitivity analysis to study the effects of carbon tax on welfare distribution of South African households, using the 2014-2015 Living Conditions Survey (LCS). The study also set out to determine the relative sensitivity of price changes of some building materials after application of the 2019 carbon tax. Results showed that non-ferrous, ferrous, and prefabricated-based building materials had higher relative price sensitivities to carbon tax compared to other materials that were predominantly based on glass, cement, and treated metals. Increases in carbon tax may not discourage usage of relatively higher emissions-intensity materials like cement compared to wood. Operational building costs were dominated by electricity costs, with the burden being highest for lower income households. Any revenue-recycling efforts of the 2019 carbon tax for welfare purposes were marginal. However, the tax can be used to subsidize energy for lower income households.","PeriodicalId":42571,"journal":{"name":"Acta Structilia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The 2019 carbon tax in South Africa: Effects on relative cost of building materials, welfare, emissions, and energy consumption for households\",\"authors\":\"Emmanuel Kabundu, Sijekula Mbanga, P.L.K. Makasa\",\"doi\":\"10.18820/24150487/as29i2.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The introduction of the carbon tax by South Africa was primarily aimed at reducing pollution, and possibly improving the welfare of South African households. One of the ways of reducing pollution in the construction industry is to discourage the use of building materials that are high carbon emitters or have high energy intensities. This article used the Input-Output (IO) method and sensitivity analysis to study the effects of carbon tax on welfare distribution of South African households, using the 2014-2015 Living Conditions Survey (LCS). The study also set out to determine the relative sensitivity of price changes of some building materials after application of the 2019 carbon tax. Results showed that non-ferrous, ferrous, and prefabricated-based building materials had higher relative price sensitivities to carbon tax compared to other materials that were predominantly based on glass, cement, and treated metals. Increases in carbon tax may not discourage usage of relatively higher emissions-intensity materials like cement compared to wood. Operational building costs were dominated by electricity costs, with the burden being highest for lower income households. Any revenue-recycling efforts of the 2019 carbon tax for welfare purposes were marginal. However, the tax can be used to subsidize energy for lower income households.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Structilia\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Structilia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18820/24150487/as29i2.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Structilia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18820/24150487/as29i2.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

南非征收碳税的主要目的是减少污染,并可能改善南非家庭的福利。减少建筑行业污染的方法之一是不鼓励使用高碳排放或高能耗的建筑材料。本文采用投入产出(IO)方法和敏感性分析,利用2014-2015年生活条件调查(LCS),研究了碳税对南非家庭福利分配的影响。该研究还旨在确定2019年碳税实施后一些建筑材料价格变化的相对敏感性。结果表明,与主要由玻璃、水泥和处理过的金属构成的其他材料相比,有色金属、含铁金属和预制建筑材料对碳税的相对价格敏感性更高。碳税的增加可能不会阻碍人们使用排放强度相对较高的材料,比如水泥,而不是木材。运营建筑成本主要是电费,低收入家庭的负担最重。2019年以福利为目的的碳税的任何收入回收努力都是微不足道的。然而,税收可以用来补贴低收入家庭的能源。
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 2019 carbon tax in South Africa: Effects on relative cost of building materials, welfare, emissions, and energy consumption for households
The introduction of the carbon tax by South Africa was primarily aimed at reducing pollution, and possibly improving the welfare of South African households. One of the ways of reducing pollution in the construction industry is to discourage the use of building materials that are high carbon emitters or have high energy intensities. This article used the Input-Output (IO) method and sensitivity analysis to study the effects of carbon tax on welfare distribution of South African households, using the 2014-2015 Living Conditions Survey (LCS). The study also set out to determine the relative sensitivity of price changes of some building materials after application of the 2019 carbon tax. Results showed that non-ferrous, ferrous, and prefabricated-based building materials had higher relative price sensitivities to carbon tax compared to other materials that were predominantly based on glass, cement, and treated metals. Increases in carbon tax may not discourage usage of relatively higher emissions-intensity materials like cement compared to wood. Operational building costs were dominated by electricity costs, with the burden being highest for lower income households. Any revenue-recycling efforts of the 2019 carbon tax for welfare purposes were marginal. However, the tax can be used to subsidize energy for lower income households.
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
Acta Structilia
Acta Structilia MANAGEMENT-
自引率
14.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Optimisation of labour-intensive productivity for construction projects in Ghana Labour productivity in construction SMEs: Perspectives from South Africa Predictors of corruption among town planners: A Nigerian case study Impact of urban renewal changes on urban landscape identity: Case study of Kisumu City, Kenya A conceptual quality improvement protocol for Free State public works projects
×
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