scholarly journals Environmental tipping points significantly affect the cost−benefit assessment of climate policies

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (15) ◽  
pp. 4606-4611 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongyang Cai ◽  
Kenneth L. Judd ◽  
Timothy M. Lenton ◽  
Thomas S. Lontzek ◽  
Daiju Narita
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Tipping Point ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Benefit Assessment ◽  
Tipping Points ◽  
Nonmarket Goods

Most current cost−benefit analyses of climate change policies suggest an optimal global climate policy that is significantly less stringent than the level required to meet the internationally agreed 2 °C target. This is partly because the sum of estimated economic damage of climate change across various sectors, such as energy use and changes in agricultural production, results in only a small economic loss or even a small economic gain in the gross world product under predicted levels of climate change. However, those cost−benefit analyses rarely take account of environmental tipping points leading to abrupt and irreversible impacts on market and nonmarket goods and services, including those provided by the climate and by ecosystems. Here we show that including environmental tipping point impacts in a stochastic dynamic integrated assessment model profoundly alters cost−benefit assessment of global climate policy. The risk of a tipping point, even if it only has nonmarket impacts, could substantially increase the present optimal carbon tax. For example, a risk of only 5% loss in nonmarket goods that occurs with a 5% annual probability at 4 °C increase of the global surface temperature causes an immediate two-thirds increase in optimal carbon tax. If the tipping point also has a 5% impact on market goods, the optimal carbon tax increases by more than a factor of 3. Hence existing cost−benefit assessments of global climate policy may be significantly underestimating the needs for controlling climate change.

scholarly journals The Consequences of Uncertainty: Climate Sensitivity and Economic Sensitivity to the Climate

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hassler ◽  
Per Krusell ◽  
Conny Olovsson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Green Energy ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Negative Impacts

We construct an integrated assessment model with multiple energy sources—two fossil fuels and green energy—and use it to evaluate ranges of plausible estimates for the climate sensitivity, as well as for the sensitivity of the economy to climate change. Rather than focusing explicitly on uncertainty, we look at extreme scenarios defined by the upper and lower limits given in available studies in the literature. We compare optimal policy with laissez faire, and we point out the possible policy errors that could arise. By far the largest policy error arises when the climate policy is overly passive; overly zealous climate policy (i.e., a high carbon tax applied when climate change and its negative impacts on the economy are very limited) does not hurt the economy much as there is considerable substitutability between fossil and nonfossil energy sources.

Comments: Carbon Tariffs - Fair Incentives for Change?

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Pam Boschee
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Carbon Price ◽  
Carbon Leakage ◽  
Carbon Taxes ◽  
Trading Systems ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Carbon Tariff

Carbon credits, carbon taxes, and emissions trading systems are familiar terms in discussions about limiting global warming, the Paris Agreement, and net-zero emissions goals. A more recent addition to the glossary of climate policy is “carbon tariff.” While the concept is not new, it recently surfaced in nascent policymaking in the EU. In 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a “carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)” as part of a proposed green deal. In March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on a World Trade Organization (WTO)-compatible CBAM. A carbon tariff, or the EU’s CBAM, is a tax applied to carbon-intensive imports. Countries that have pledged to be more ambitious in reducing emissions—and in some cases have implemented binding targets—may impose carbon costs on their own businesses. Being eyed now are cross-border or overseas businesses that make products in countries in which no costs are imposed for emissions, resulting in cheaper carbon-intensive goods. Those products are exported to the countries aiming for reduced emissions. The concern lies in the risk of locally made goods becoming unfairly disadvantaged against competitors that are not taking similar steps to deal with climate change. A carbon tariff is being considered to level the playing field: local businesses in countries applying a tariff can better compete as climate policies evolve and are adopted around the world. Complying with WTO rules to ensure fair treatment, the CBAM will be imposed only on high-emitting industries that compete directly with local industries paying a carbon price. In the short term, these are likely to be steel, chemicals, fertilizers, and cement. The Parliament’s statement introduced another term to the glossary of climate policy: carbon leakage. “To raise global climate ambition and prevent ‘carbon leakage,’ the EU must place a carbon price on imports from less climate-ambitious countries.” It refers to the situation that may occur if businesses were to transfer production to other countries with laxer emission constraints to avoid costs related to climate policies. This could lead to an increase in total emissions in the higher-emitting countries. “The resolution underlines that the EU’s increased ambition on climate change must not lead to carbon leakage as global climate efforts will not benefit if EU production is just moved to non-EU countries that have less ambitious emissions rules,” the Parliament said. It also emphasized the tariff “must not be misused to further protectionism.” A member of the environment committee, Yannick Jadot, said, “It is a major political and democratic test for the EU, which must stop being naïve and impose the same carbon price on products, whether they are produced in or outside the EU, to ensure the most polluting sectors also take part in fighting climate change and innovate towards zero carbon. This will give us the best chance of remaining below the 1.5°C warming limit, whilst also pushing our trading partners to be equally ambitious in order to enter the EU market.” The Commission is expected to present a legislative proposal on a CBAM in the second quarter of 2021 as part of the European Green Deal.

scholarly journals The European Green Deal and Climate Policy of the New Independent States

2021 ◽  
pp. 164-182
Author(s):  
E. Burkova
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
National Development ◽  
Carbon Intensity ◽  
Transition Mechanism ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Independent States ◽  
New Independent States ◽  
The Eu

This article considers the most relevant component of the global environmental problem – the climate one. The article aims to identify the reaction of a national state to the global climate challenge. The subject of consideration is climate policy and, more broadly, the whole set of reactions of the political sphere of society to the global climate change. Among the tasks set by the author is to understand the nature of setting and solving new climatic environmental problems, to find out how they fit into national development strategies, to establish the interdependence of the climate ambitions of countries with the type of development, the carbon intensity of their economies, the structure of exports, the degree of energy independence. The solution of these tasks is carried out on the example of a number of new independent states (including CIS ones). A brief comparative analysis of these countries’ and the EU climate activities is carried out. The breakthrough event of the European environmental policy – the Green Deal of 2019 is taken as a starting point for the analysis. The main attention is paid to the key instrument of the EU climate policy today – the border carbon tax. Additional attention is paid to the observance of the principles of social justice in the implementation of new environmental activities (a just transition mechanism). The paper pays special attention to the role of Russia in the global climatic process. An assessment of the state of the climate segment of the environmental protection industry of our country, as well as the prospects for its development, is given.

A CGE Analysis of the Effects of Global Climate Change Mitigation Policies on India

2018 ◽  
pp. 573-590
Author(s):  
Basanta K. Pradhan ◽  
Joydeep Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Mitigation Policy ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
Mitigation Policies

This paper compares the effects of a global carbon tax and a global emissions trading regime on India using a dynamic CGE framework. The sensitivity of the results to the value of a crucial elasticity parameter is also analysed. The results suggest that the choice of the mitigation policy is relatively unimportant from an efficiency perspective. However, the choice of the mitigation policy and the value of the substitution elasticity between value added and energy were found to be important determinants of welfare effects. Global climate change mitigation policies have the potential for promoting low carbon and inclusive growth in India.

Anti-politics and Global Climate Inaction: The Case of the Australian Carbon Tax

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 623-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Copland
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Emissions Trading ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
New Class ◽  
Working People ◽  
Trading Scheme ◽  
Paris Climate Agreement ◽  
Climate Crisis

Action on climate change has enjoyed popular support in most Western countries. Despite this, successive governments have struggled to implement policy to tackle this issue. Using the case of opposition to the Clean Energy Act, passed in Australia to establish an emissions trading scheme, this paper argues that a growing and broad sentiment of distrust in political elites, described as ‘anti-politics’, can explain some of this contradiction. Particular forms of climate policy, in particular emissions trading schemes, have been successfully framed as policies that appeal to the interests of a new class of liberal elites while hurting ordinary working people. This frame was used successfully in Australia by conservative forces to oppose the Clean Energy Act. While used cynically by political leaders in this case, the paper argues that anti-political sentiment reflects genuine concerns about the detachment between the state and voting population. This detachment is reflected in neoliberal climate policies. Through briefly examining the cases of the Trump Administration’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and the Gilets Jaunes protest movement, the paper argues that while formulating climate policy we must consider anti-political sentiment, developing responses to the climate crisis from a bottom-up rather than top-down approach.

HOW TO MEASURE THE IMPORTANCE OF CLIMATE RISK FOR DETERMINING OPTIMAL GLOBAL ABATEMENT POLICIES?

2012 ◽  
Vol 03 (01) ◽  
pp. 1250004 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALEXANDER LORENZ ◽  
ELMAR KRIEGLER ◽  
HERMANN HELD ◽  
MATTHIAS G. W. SCHMIDT
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Risk Premium ◽  
Optimal Policy ◽  
Integrated Assessment ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Functional Relationships ◽  
Abatement Policies ◽  
Marginal Risk

We investigate the importance of explicitly accounting for uncertainty in the determination of optimal global climate policy. We demonstrate that the marginal risk premium determines the importance of adapting the optimal policy to uncertainty. Common integrated assessment models (IAM) of climate change suggest uncertainty has little effect because the marginal risk premium in these models is small. A rigorous investigation of the marginal risk premium and the marginal functional relationships within IAMs allows understanding the non-significance of (thin-tailed) uncertainty as a result of compensating factors in the climate cause-effect chain.

scholarly journals BRICS Countries in International Climate Policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-78
Author(s):  
Yuri Yurievich Kovalev ◽  
Olga Sergeevna Porshneva
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Ecological Modernization ◽  
Carbon Intensity ◽  
Brics Countries ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
International Climate Policy ◽  
International Climate

The article presents an analysis of the BRICS countries climate policies at the global and national levels. The authors consider the positions of these states within the framework of both international climate conferences (Conference of the Parties) held under the auspices of the UN since 1992, and the summits of BRICS member states in the years 2011-2020. The paper covers strategies and results of national climate policies implemented in these countries. Using structural, comparative, and content analysis methods, the authors emphasize that BRICS countries play a key role in stabilizing the climate of our planet today. It is impossible to achieve the main aim of the Paris Agreement without a comprehensive transformation of environmental practices in these societies. BRICS adheres to the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities in its position towards international climate policy; the BRICS countries stand for sustainable economic growth through the introduction of new environmental technologies, and against restrictive measures that impede their economic development. At the same time, the Russian economys dependence on the extraction and export of fuel resources complicates environmental transformation. Russia is dominated by a negative narrative of climate change, where the urgent ecological modernization of the economy is seen as a threat to key sectors (oil and gas) of the economy. The implementation of international agreements to reduce the carbon intensity of the Russian economy, the creation of conditions for the transition to climate-neutral technologies, would contribute not only to the fight against global climate change, but would become a powerful incentive for the modernization of the economy, accelerating innovation and increasing its competitiveness.

scholarly journals Knowing Behavior Matters Doesn’t Hurt: The Effect of Individual Climate Behavior Messaging on Green Policy Support

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdurakhim Rakhimov ◽  
Erik Thulin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Behavior Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Individual Behavior ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Large Impact ◽  
Mitigation Potential ◽  
Green Policy ◽  
Personal Behavior

Promoting individual behavior change has been criticized as a strategy for addressing climate change due to its potential to diminish climate policy support. In a pre-registered study, we find that messages recommending the adoption of individual climate behaviors and highlighting their large impact do not affect support for a carbon tax. Programs that encourage personal behavior change with substantial mitigation potential offer complementary opportunities to policy without undermining its effectiveness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document