IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v109y2017icp835-844.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economy impacts of Korean ETS with an emphasis on sectoral coverage based on a CGE approach

Author

Listed:
  • Choi, Yongrok
  • Liu, Yu
  • Lee, Hyoungseok

Abstract

South Korea initiated an emissions trading scheme (ETS) on January 1, 2015. Based on this environmental policy, at the 21st Conference of Parties (COP) meeting, the Korean government announced that it would decrease carbon emissions 37% from business as usual (BAU) levels by 2030. Since this target is too ambitious for the Korean economy, a number of studies have analyzed the economic impacts of emissions trading in Korea, but few have distinguished between industries covered and not covered by the ETS, notwithstanding the lack of industry-level data on quotas and emissions. This study overcomes such shortcomings by converting a dataset of 525 firms covered by the South Korea ETS (SK-ETS) into a 28-sector database consistent with the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) classifications. We implement a simulation of the SK-ETS with a computational general equilibrium (CGE) model. Simulation results suggest that while SK-ETS has significant abatement effects (−2.56% from the base case), it only has mild negative impacts on GDP (0.41%) and household consumption (0.11%). Industry output on average falls by 0.54%, with the gas and air transport sectors most adversely affected. The most noticeable price changes are from the electricity sector, whose output price goes up by 3.75%. It is noteworthy that because of the export-oriented economy, many global business leaders and politicians have argued that the ETS will disadvantage exporting companies, while the simulation results showed a higher trade surplus based on enhanced competitiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Choi, Yongrok & Liu, Yu & Lee, Hyoungseok, 2017. "The economy impacts of Korean ETS with an emphasis on sectoral coverage based on a CGE approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 835-844.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:835-844
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517303968
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.039?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Perthuis, Christian & Trotignon, Raphael, 2014. "Governance of CO2 markets: Lessons from the EU ETS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-106.
    2. Nijkamp, Peter & Wang, Shunli & Kremers, Hans, 2005. "Modeling the impacts of international climate change policies in a CGE context: The use of the GTAP-E model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 955-974, December.
    3. Christoph Böhringer & Andreas Lange, 2005. "Mission Impossible !? On the Harmonization of National Allocation Plans under the EU Emissions Trading Directive," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 81-94, September.
    4. Park, Hojeong & Hong, Won Kyung, 2014. "Korea׳s emission trading scheme and policy design issues to achieve market-efficiency and abatement targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-83.
    5. Zhao, Jinhua, 2003. "Irreversible abatement investment under cost uncertainties: tradable emission permits and emissions charges," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(12), pages 2765-2789, December.
    6. Zhang, Ning & Zhou, P. & Choi, Yongrok, 2013. "Energy efficiency, CO2 emission performance and technology gaps in fossil fuel electricity generation in Korea: A meta-frontier non-radial directional distance functionanalysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 653-662.
    7. Riccardi, R. & Oggioni, G. & Toninelli, R., 2012. "Efficiency analysis of world cement industry in presence of undesirable output: Application of data envelopment analysis and directional distance function," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 140-152.
    8. Lee, Cheng F. & Lin, Sue J. & Lewis, Charles, 2008. "Analysis of the impacts of combining carbon taxation and emission trading on different industry sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 722-729, February.
    9. Tang, Ling & Wu, Jiaqian & Yu, Lean & Bao, Qin, 2015. "Carbon emissions trading scheme exploration in China: A multi-agent-based model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 152-169.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13539 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Claudia Kemfert & Michael Kohlhaas & Truong Truong & Artem Protsenko, 2006. "The environmental and economic effects of European emissions trading," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 441-455, July.
    12. Richard G. Newell & William A. Pizer & Daniel Raimi, 2013. "Carbon Markets 15 Years after Kyoto: Lessons Learned, New Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 123-146, Winter.
    13. Song, Tae-Ho & Lim, Kyoung-Min & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2015. "Estimating the public’s value of implementing the CO2 emissions trading scheme in Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 82-86.
    14. Nathaniel O. Keohane, 2009. "Cap and Trade, Rehabilitated: Using Tradable Permits to Control U.S. Greenhouse Gases," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(1), pages 42-62, Winter.
    15. Lim, Jaekyu, 2011. "Impacts and implications of implementing voluntary greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in major countries and Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5086-5095, September.
    16. Myunghun, Lee, 2011. "Potential cost savings from internal/external CO2 emissions trading in the Korean electric power industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6162-6167, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Simon Quemin, 2016. "Intertemporal abatement decisions under ambiguity aversion in a cap and trade," Working Papers 1604, Chaire Economie du climat.
    2. 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).
    3. Zhang, Cheng & Wang, Qunwei & Shi, Dan & Li, Pengfei & Cai, Wanhuan, 2016. "Scenario-based potential effects of carbon trading in China: An integrated approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 177-190.
    4. Zhao, Xin-gang & Jiang, Gui-wu & Nie, Dan & Chen, Hao, 2016. "How to improve the market efficiency of carbon trading: A perspective of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1229-1245.
    5. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    6. Park, Hojeong & Hong, Won Kyung, 2014. "Korea׳s emission trading scheme and policy design issues to achieve market-efficiency and abatement targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-83.
    7. Jiang, Jingjing & Xie, Dejun & Ye, Bin & Shen, Bo & Chen, Zhanming, 2016. "Research on China’s cap-and-trade carbon emission trading scheme: Overview and outlook," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 902-917.
    8. Tang, Ling & Shi, Jiarui & Bao, Qin, 2016. "Designing an emissions trading scheme for China with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 507-520.
    9. 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.
    10. Seo, Su Been & Kim, Hyung Woo & Kang, Seo Yeong & Go, Eun Sol & Keel, Sang In & Lee, See Hoon, 2021. "Techno-economic comparison between air-fired and oxy-fuel circulating fluidized bed power plants with ultra-supercritical cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    11. Zhang, Wei & Li, Guoxiang & Guo, Fanyong, 2022. "Does carbon emissions trading promote green technology innovation in China?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    12. Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J. & Spraggon, John M., 2014. "Price controls and banking in emissions trading: An experimental evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 71-86.
    13. Raphaël Trotignon & Pierre-André Jouvet & Boris Solier & Simon Quemin & Jérémy Elbeze, 2015. "European carbon market: lessons on the impact of a market stability reserve using the Zephyr model," Working Papers 1511, Chaire Economie du climat.
    14. Simon Quemin & Christian Perthuis, 2019. "Transitional Restricted Linkage Between Emissions Trading Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 1-32, September.
    15. Yang, Lin & Li, Fengyu & Zhang, Xian, 2016. "Chinese companies’ awareness and perceptions of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS): Evidence from a national survey in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 254-265.
    16. Berrittella Maria & Cimino Filippo Alessandro, 2017. "An Assessment of Carousel Value-Added Tax Fraud in The European Carbon Market," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Yao, Xin & Zhou, Hongchen & Zhang, Aizhen & Li, Aijun, 2015. "Regional energy efficiency, carbon emission performance and technology gaps in China: A meta-frontier non-radial directional distance function analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 142-154.
    18. Nejati, Mehdi & Shah, Muhammad Ibrahim, 2023. "How does ICT trade shape environmental impacts across the north-south regions? Intra-regional and Inter-regional perspective from dynamic CGE model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    19. Lin, Boqiang & Du, Kerui, 2015. "Energy and CO2 emissions performance in China's regional economies: Do market-oriented reforms matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 113-124.
    20. Beckman, Jayson & Hertel, Thomas & Tyner, Wallace, 2011. "Validating energy-oriented CGE models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 799-806, September.

    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:eee:enepol:v:109:y:2017:i:c:p:835-844. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.