IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v39y2022i5p654-673.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon pricing and decoupling between greenhouse gas emissions and economic growth: A panel study of 29 European countries, 1996–2014

Author

Listed:
  • Inhwan Ko
  • Taedong Lee

Abstract

This study explores why the levels of decoupling between greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and economic growth vary across time and countries by examining to which extent carbon pricing instruments are driving this decoupling. We expect that the implementation of carbon pricing instruments facilitates decoupling, as they are designed to achieve cost‐efficient GHG reduction. We analyze a panel data of 29 European countries between 1996 and 2014 to examine the relationships between two carbon pricing instruments (emission trading (ETS) and carbon tax) and emission intensity (GHG emissions per unit of GDP) which we use to measure decoupling trends. Results from two‐way fixed effects models show that emission trading contributes to decoupling, whereas our evidence does not support the role of carbon tax. Furthermore, emission trading is negatively associated with both emission intensity and GHG emissions, implying that it contributes to strong decoupling. Using coarsened exact matching (CEM), our results suggest that even a single emission trading policy (e.g., EU‐ETS) across different jurisdictions may render a heterogeneous effect on decoupling depending on their socioeconomic conditions. 本研究通过分析碳定价工具在多大程度上驱动脱钩，探究了温室气体（GHG）排放和经济增长的脱钩程度为何在不同时间和国家中出现差异。我们期望碳定价工具的执行会促进脱钩，因为它们被设计用于实现成本有效的GHG减排。我们分析了一项关于1996‐2014年间29个欧洲国家的面板数据，分析两种碳定价工具（排放交易（ETS）和碳税）和排放强度（每个GDP单位的GHG排放）之间的关系，并通过这种关系来衡量脱钩趋势。双向固定效应模型得出的结果表明，排放交易促进了脱钩，不过，我们的证据并不支持碳税的作用。此外，排放交易与排放强度及GHG排放均呈负相关，这暗示其对强有力的脱钩作贡献。通过使用广义精确匹配（CEM）数据，我们的研究结果暗示，即使是跨越不同管辖范围的单一排放交易政策（例如EU‐ETS），也能对脱钩产生异质性效果，这取决于其社会经济条件。 Este estudio explora por qué los niveles de disociación entre las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) y el crecimiento económico varían a lo largo del tiempo y los países al examinar hasta qué punto los instrumentos de fijación de precios del carbono están impulsando esta disociación. Esperamos que la implementación de los instrumentos de fijación de precios del carbono facilite la disociación, ya que están diseñados para lograr una reducción de GEI rentable. Analizamos un panel de datos de 29 países europeos entre 1996 y 2014 para examinar las relaciones entre dos instrumentos de fijación de precios del carbono (comercio de emisiones (ETS) e impuesto al carbono) y la intensidad de las emisiones (emisiones de GEI por unidad de PIB) que utilizamos para medir las tendencias de disociación. Los resultados de los modelos de efectos fijos bidireccionales muestran que el comercio de emisiones contribuye a la disociación, mientras que nuestra evidencia no respalda el papel del impuesto al carbono. Además, el comercio de emisiones está asociado negativamente tanto con la intensidad de las emisiones como con las emisiones de GEI, lo que implica que contribuye a una fuerte disociación. Utilizando datos aproximados de emparejamiento exacto (CEM), nuestros resultados sugieren que incluso una sola política de comercio de emisiones (por ejemplo, EU‐ETS) en diferentes jurisdicciones puede tener un efecto heterogéneo en el desacoplamiento dependiendo de sus condiciones socioeconómicas.

Suggested Citation

  • Inhwan Ko & Taedong Lee, 2022. "Carbon pricing and decoupling between greenhouse gas emissions and economic growth: A panel study of 29 European countries, 1996–2014," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 654-673, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:5:p:654-673
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12458
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12458?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrence H. Goulder & Andrew R. Schein, 2013. "Carbon Taxes Versus Cap And Trade: A Critical Review," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(03), pages 1-28.
    2. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    3. Martin L. Weitzman, 1974. "Prices vs. Quantities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(4), pages 477-491.
    4. Erik Haites, 2018. "Carbon taxes and greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: what have we learned?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 955-966, September.
    5. Boyce, James K., 2018. "Carbon Pricing: Effectiveness and Equity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 52-61.
    6. Jakob Skovgaard & Sofía Sacks Ferrari & Åsa Knaggård, 2019. "Mapping and clustering the adoption of carbon pricing policies: what polities price carbon and why?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(9), pages 1173-1185, October.
    7. Paul G. Harris & Taedong Lee, 2017. "Compliance with climate change agreements: the constraints of consumption," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 779-794, December.
    8. Tom H. Tietenberg, 2013. "Reflections--Carbon Pricing in Practice ," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(2), pages 313-329, July.
    9. Martin L. Weitzman, 2014. "Can Negotiating a Uniform Carbon Price Help to Internalize the Global Warming Externality?," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 29-49.
    10. Andreoni, V. & Galmarini, S., 2012. "Decoupling economic growth from carbon dioxide emissions: A decomposition analysis of Italian energy consumption," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 682-691.
    11. John C. Driscoll & Aart C. Kraay, 1998. "Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially Dependent Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 549-560, November.
    12. World Bank, "undated". "State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2020 [Situación y tendencias de la fijación del precio al carbono 2020]," World Bank Publications - Reports 33809, The World Bank Group.
    13. Rogge, Karoline S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2010. "The impact of the EU ETS on the sectoral innovation system for power generation technologies - Findings for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7639-7652, December.
    14. Lawrence H. Goulder & Andrew Schein, 2013. "Carbon Taxes vs. Cap and Trade: A Critical Review," NBER Working Papers 19338, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Roger Karapin, 2020. "The Political Viability of Carbon Pricing: Policy Design and Framing in British Columbia and California," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(2), pages 140-173, March.
    16. Farzin, Y. Hossein & Bond, Craig A., 2006. "Democracy and environmental quality," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 213-235, October.
    17. Andrew Bell & Malcolm Fairbrother & Kelvyn Jones, 2019. "Fixed and random effects models: making an informed choice," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 1051-1074, March.
    18. Imai, Kosuke & Kim, In Song, 2021. "On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 405-415, July.
    19. Mo, Jian-Lei & Agnolucci, Paolo & Jiang, Mao-Rong & Fan, Ying, 2016. "The impact of Chinese carbon emission trading scheme (ETS) on low carbon energy (LCE) investment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 271-283.
    20. Baranzini, Andrea & Goldemberg, Jose & Speck, Stefan, 2000. "A future for carbon taxes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 395-412, March.
    21. Wu, Ya & Zhu, Qianwen & Zhu, Bangzhu, 2018. "Comparisons of decoupling trends of global economic growth and energy consumption between developed and developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 30-38.
    22. Sharon Mascher, 2018. "Striving for equivalency across the Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Québec carbon pricing systems: the Pan-Canadian carbon pricing benchmark," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 1012-1027, September.
    23. Sandoff, Anders & Schaad, Gabriela, 2009. "Does EU ETS lead to emission reductions through trade? The case of the Swedish emissions trading sector participants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 3967-3977, October.
    24. Markus Lederer, 2017. "Carbon Trading: Who Gets What, When, and How?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(3), pages 134-140, August.
    25. Benjamin K. Sovacool & Patrick Schmid & Andy Stirling & Goetz Walter & Gordon MacKerron, 2020. "Differences in carbon emissions reduction between countries pursuing renewable electricity versus nuclear power," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 5(11), pages 928-935, November.
    26. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    27. Iacus, Stefano M. & King, Gary & Porro, Giuseppe, 2012. "Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 1-24, January.
    28. Easwaran Narassimhan & Kelly S. Gallagher & Stefan Koester & Julio Rivera Alejo, 2018. "Carbon pricing in practice: a review of existing emissions trading systems," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 967-991, September.
    29. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    30. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schneider, Malte & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2011. "The innovation impact of the EU Emission Trading System -- Findings of company case studies in the German power sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 513-523, January.
    31. Goldemberg, José, 2020. "The evolution of the energy and carbon intensities of developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    32. Miklós Antal & Jeroen C.J.M. Van Den Bergh, 2016. "Green growth and climate change: conceptual and empirical considerations," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 165-177, March.
    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. Qianqi Xu & Peng Xu & Cunkuan Bao, 2023. "Multifaceted Pathways of Carbon Emission Reduction Policies: A Study Based on the Decoupling Effect and fsQCA Method in the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-15, September.

    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. Dissanayake, Sumali & Mahadevan, Renuka & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2020. "Evaluating the efficiency of carbon emissions policies in a large emitting developing country," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Ritter, Hendrik & Zimmermann, Karl, 2019. "Cap-and-Trade Policy vs. Carbon Taxation: Of Leakage and Linkage," EconStor Preprints 197796, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Buchholz Wolfgang & Heindl Peter, 2015. "Ökonomische Herausforderungen des Klimawandels," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 16(4), pages 324-350, December.
    4. Robert N. Stavins, 2020. "The Future of US Carbon-Pricing Policy," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 8-64.
    5. John F. Raffensperger, 2020. "A price on warming with a supply chain directed market," Papers 2003.05114, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2021.
    6. Muth, Daniel, 2023. "Pathways to stringent carbon pricing: Configurations of political economy conditions and revenue recycling strategies. A comparison of thirty national level policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    7. Johan Lilliestam & Anthony Patt & Germán Bersalli, 2021. "The effect of carbon pricing on technological change for full energy decarbonization: A review of empirical ex‐post evidence," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), January.
    8. David M. Newbery & David M. Reiner & Robert A. Ritz, 2018. "When is a carbon price floor desirable?," Working Papers EPRG 1816, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    9. Johan Lilliestam & Anthony Patt & Germán Bersalli, 2022. "On the quality of emission reductions: observed effects of carbon pricing on investments, innovation, and operational shifts. A response to van den Bergh and Savin (2021)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 733-758, November.
    10. Sim, Seung-Gyu & Lin, Hsuan-Chih, 2018. "Competitive dominance of emission trading over Pigouvian taxation in a globalized economy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 158-161.
    11. Martin Rabbia, 2023. "Why did Argentina and Uruguay decide to pursue a carbon tax? Fiscal reforms and explicit carbon prices," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(2), pages 230-259, March.
    12. Hammerle, Mara & Best, Rohan & Crosby, Paul, 2021. "Public acceptance of carbon taxes in Australia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Stavins, Robert N., 2019. "The Future of U.S. Carbon-Pricing Policy: Normative Assessment and Positive Prognosis," Working Paper Series rwp19-017, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Yan Xiao & Yan Zhang & Jiekuan Zhang, 2023. "The Impact of Carbon Emission Trading on Industrial Green Total Factor Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    16. Weitzman, Martin L., 2017. "Voting on prices vs. voting on quantities in a World Climate Assembly," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 199-211.
    17. Marcin Rabe & Dalia Streimikiene & Yuriy Bilan, 2019. "EU Carbon Emissions Market Development and Its Impact on Penetration of Renewables in the Power Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Mandaroux, Rahel & Schindelhauer, Kai & Basse Mama, Houdou, 2023. "How to reinforce the effectiveness of the EU emissions trading system in stimulating low-carbon technological change? Taking stock and future directions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    19. Carlsson, Fredrik & Hammar, Henrik, 2002. "Incentive-based regulation of CO2 emissions from international aviation," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 365-372.
    20. Stavins, Robert, 2019. "The Future of United States Carbon-Pricing Policy," RFF Working Paper Series 19-11, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    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:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:5:p:654-673. 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/ipsonea.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.