IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/econpa/v33y2014i4p315-326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Much Abatement Will Australia's Emissions Reduction Fund Buy?

Author

Listed:
  • Harry Clarke
  • Iain Fraser
  • Robert George Waschik

Abstract

type="main" xml:id="ecpa12097-abs-0001"> The economic implications for Australia for replacing its carbon tax policy with an Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) scheme are examined. A computable general equilibrium model is used to show that the budget allocated for the ERF provides about 50 per cent of that required to meet Australia's greenhouse gas abatement commitments.

Suggested Citation

  • Harry Clarke & Iain Fraser & Robert George Waschik, 2014. "How Much Abatement Will Australia's Emissions Reduction Fund Buy?," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 33(4), pages 315-326, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:econpa:v:33:y:2014:i:4:p:315-326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ecpa.2015.33.issue-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fraser, Iain & Waschik, Robert, 2013. "The Double Dividend hypothesis in a CGE model: Specific factors and the carbon base," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 283-295.
    2. Harry Clarke & Robert Waschik, 2012. "Australia's Carbon Pricing Strategies in a Global Context," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(s1), pages 22-37, June.
    3. Stoneham, Gary & Chaudhri, Vivek & Ha, Arthur & Strappazzon, Loris, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria’s BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-24.
    4. Gary Stoneham & Vivek Chaudhri & Arthur Ha & Loris Strappazzon, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 477-500, December.
    5. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521311120 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521322249 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meng, Sam & Siriwardana, Mahinda & McNeill, Judith & Nelson, Tim, 2018. "The impact of an ETS on the Australian energy sector: An integrated CGE and electricity modelling approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 213-224.
    2. Paul J. Burke, 2016. "Undermined by Adverse Selection: Australia's Direct Action Abatement Subsidies," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 216-229, September.
    3. McNeill, Judith, 2015. "A review of the economic modelling on the impacts of the Australian carbon tax," Conference papers 332598, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Nong, Duy & Simshauser, Paul & Nguyen, Duong Binh, 2021. "Greenhouse gas emissions vs CO2 emissions: Comparative analysis of a global carbon tax," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    5. Nong, Duy & Meng, Sam & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2017. "An assessment of a proposed ETS in Australia by using the MONASH-Green model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 281-291.
    6. John Freebairn, 2016. "A Comparison of Policy Instruments to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 204-215, September.
    7. Nong, Duy & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2018. "Potential impacts of the Emissions Reduction Fund on the Australian economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 387-398.
    8. Nong, Duy, 2020. "Development of the electricity-environmental policy CGE model (GTAP-E-PowerS): A case of the carbon tax in South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Meng, Xianming & Siriwardana, Mahinda & McNeill, Judith, 2015. "Will the direct action plan work?," Conference papers 332602, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Siriwardana, Mahinda & Nong, Duy, 2015. "Australia in an International Emissions Trading (ETS) Scheme: An Economic Evaluation Using the GTAP-E Model," Conference papers 332632, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valle, Haydn & Capon, Timothy & Harris, Michael & Reeson, Andrew, 2012. "Coordination and Strategic Behaviour in Landscape Auctions," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124466, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S., 2008. "Quantifying the Benefits of Conservation Auctions: Evidence from an Economic Experiment," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 43, March.
    3. Wilman, Elizabeth A., 2013. "An economic model of aboriginal fire-stick farming," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(1), March.
    4. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    5. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    6. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    7. Jonah Busch, 2013. "Supplementing REDD+ with Biodiversity Payments: The Paradox of Paying for Multiple Ecosystem Services," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 655-675.
    8. Steven Schilizzi & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2012. "Evaluating Conservation Auctions with Unknown Bidder Costs: The Scottish Fishing Vessel Decommissioning Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 658-673.
    9. Comerford, Emma & Binney, Jim, 2006. "Lessons learned from the Queensland Vegetation Incentives Program - applying auction theory to vegetation protection," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 174101, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    10. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Chan, Kai M.A., 2019. "When value conflicts are barriers: Can relational values help explain farmer participation in conservation incentive programs?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 464-475.
    11. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    12. Pengfei Liu, 2021. "Balancing Cost Effectiveness and Incentive Properties in Conservation Auctions: Experimental Evidence from Three Multi-award Reverse Auction Mechanisms," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(3), pages 417-451, March.
    13. Md Sayed Iftekhar & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2017. "How well do conservation auctions perform in achieving landscape-level outcomes? A comparison of auction formats and bid selection criteria," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(4), pages 557-575, October.
    14. Leroux, Anke D. & Whitten, Stuart M., 2014. "Optimal investment in ecological rehabilitation under climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 133-144.
    15. Toho Hien & Raphaële Preget & Mabel Tidball, 2019. "Les enchères de contrats agroenvironnementaux : comparaison expérimentale entre contrainte d’objectif et contrainte de budget," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02378412, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    16. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, T. Edward, 2019. "Designing cost-efficient payments for forest-based carbon sequestration: An auction-based modeling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 182-194.
    17. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    18. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    19. M. S. Iftekhar & A. Hailu & R. K. Lindner, 2014. "Does It Pay to Increase Competition in Combinatorial Conservation Auctions?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 62(3), pages 411-433, September.
    20. Chakrabarti, Anwesha & Liu, Pengfei & Swallow, Stephen K., 2018. "Implementing Reverse Auctions with Screening Criteria to Provide Ecosystem Services," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274046, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:econpa:v:33:y:2014:i:4:p:315-326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esausea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.