IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v122y2018icp45-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Positive and normative analysis of the output opportunity costs of GHG emissions reductions: A comparison of the six largest EU economies

Author

Listed:
  • Guerra, Ana-Isabel
  • Sancho, Ferran

Abstract

Any policy that aims at reducing GHG emissions by way of modulating the structure of an economy will entail resource reallocation and therefore an implicit economic cost. In this paper, we present a novel answer to this question using positive and normative analyses in such a way that they complement one another. From a positive perspective, we first propose a new look at the analysis of sectors’ distributed GHG forward emissions on the basis of absolute rather than marginal effects. Using this information, we then move to a normative viewpoint using an environmental extended input-output linear programming system and compute lower bounds for the potential gross and net output losses for each production unit when facing emissions reduction targets, such as those proposed by the European Union in their 20-20-20 Directive. The originality of our approach relies on two aspects, namely, the introduction of an Armington assumption to link domestic and imported output and that, differently to previous works, total final demand drives the optimal adjustments to reach emissions cuts while minimizing output losses. Our empirical exercise compares the results of these normative and positive analyses for the six largest economies in the European Union.

Suggested Citation

  • Guerra, Ana-Isabel & Sancho, Ferran, 2018. "Positive and normative analysis of the output opportunity costs of GHG emissions reductions: A comparison of the six largest EU economies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 45-62.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:122:y:2018:i:c:p:45-62
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518304683
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.022?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. Cortés-Borda, D. & Ruiz-Hernández, A. & Guillén-Gosálbez, G. & Llop, M. & Guimerà, R. & Sales-Pardo, M., 2015. "Identifying strategies for mitigating the global warming impact of the EU-25 economy using a multi-objective input–output approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 21-30.
    2. Hsu, George J. Y. & Chou, Feng-Ying, 2000. "Integrated planning for mitigating CO2 emissions in Taiwan: a multi-objective programming approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 519-523, July.
    3. Ferran Sancho, 2019. "An Armington–Leontief model," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los & Robert Stehrer & Marcel Timmer & Gaaitzen de Vries, 2013. "The Construction Of World Input-Output Tables In The Wiod Project," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 71-98, March.
    5. Fu, Xue & Lahr, Michael & Yaxiong, Zhang & Meng, Bo, 2017. "Actions on climate change, Intended Reducing carbon emissions in China via optimal industry shifts: Toward hi-tech industries, cleaner resources and higher carbon shares in less-develop regions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 616-638.
    6. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2013. "Input–output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: Competitive versus non-competitive imports," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 83-87.
    7. Buchanan, James M, 1969. "External Diseconomies, Corrective Taxes, and Market Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 174-177, March.
    8. Hristu-Varsakelis, D. & Karagianni, S. & Pempetzoglou, M. & Sfetsos, A., 2010. "Optimizing production with energy and GHG emission constraints in Greece: An input-output analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1566-1577, March.
    9. Munksgaard, Jesper & Pedersen, Klaus Alsted & Wien, Mette, 2000. "Impact of household consumption on CO2 emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 423-440, August.
    10. Alcantara, Vicent & Padilla, Emilio, 2003. ""Key" sectors in final energy consumption: an input-output application to the Spanish case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1673-1678, December.
    11. Leontief, Wassily, 1970. "Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 52(3), pages 262-271, August.
    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. Ferran Sancho, 2019. "An Armington–Leontief model," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.

    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. Roca, Jordi & Serrano, Monica, 2007. "Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: An input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 230-242, June.
    2. Wenlan Ke & Jinghua Sha & Jingjing Yan & Guofeng Zhang & Rongrong Wu, 2016. "A Multi-Objective Input–Output Linear Model for Water Supply, Economic Growth and Environmental Planning in Resource-Based Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Wang, H. & Ang, B.W. & Su, Bin, 2017. "Assessing drivers of economy-wide energy use and emissions: IDA versus SDA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 585-599.
    4. Franco Solís, Alberto & F.T. Avelino, André & Carrascal-Incera, André, 2020. "The evolution of household-induced value chains and their environmental implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. de Carvalho, Ariovaldo Lopes & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Freire, Fausto, 2016. "Economic-energy-environment analysis of prospective sugarcane bioethanol production in Brazil," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 514-526.
    6. Cortés-Borda, D. & Ruiz-Hernández, A. & Guillén-Gosálbez, G. & Llop, M. & Guimerà, R. & Sales-Pardo, M., 2015. "Identifying strategies for mitigating the global warming impact of the EU-25 economy using a multi-objective input–output approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 21-30.
    7. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    8. Zhu, Bangzhu & Su, Bin & Li, Yingzhu & Ng, Tsan Sheng, 2020. "Embodied energy and intensity in China’s (normal and processing) exports and their driving forces, 2005-2015," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    9. Kumar, Indraneel & Tyner, Wallace E. & Sinha, Kumares C., 2016. "Input–output life cycle environmental assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from utility scale wind energy in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 294-301.
    10. Boglioni, Michele & Zambelli, Stefano, 2018. "Specialization patterns and reduction of CO2 emissions. An empirical investigation of environmental preservation and economic efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 134-149.
    11. Daniel Croner & Ivan Frankovic, 2018. "A Structural Decomposition Analysis of Global and NationalEnergy Intensity Trends," The Energy Journal, , vol. 39(2), pages 103-122, March.
    12. Nieto, Jaime & Carpintero, Óscar & Miguel, Luis J. & de Blas, Ignacio, 2020. "Macroeconomic modelling under energy constraints: Global low carbon transition scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    13. Lixiao Zhang & Qiuhong Hu & Fan Zhang, 2014. "Input-Output Modeling for Urban Energy Consumption in Beijing: Dynamics and Comparison," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    14. Hoa Thi Nguyen & Naoya Kojima & Akihiro Tokai, 2019. "An input–output linear programming model for assessing climate policy considering economic growth," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 34-48, March.
    15. Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher & Foran, Barney, 2004. "Energy requirements of Sydney households," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 375-399, July.
    16. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2014. "Input–output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: A multi-region model for China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 377-384.
    17. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2015. "Multiplicative decomposition of aggregate carbon intensity change using input–output analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 13-20.
    18. Yosuke Shigetomi & Keisuke Nansai & Shigemi Kagawa & Susumu Tohno, 2016. "Influence of income difference on carbon and material footprints for critical metals: the case of Japanese households," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, December.
    19. Das, Aparna & Paul, Saikat Kumar, 2014. "CO2 emissions from household consumption in India between 1993–94 and 2006–07: A decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 90-105.
    20. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2020. "Demand contributors and driving factors of Singapore’s aggregate carbon intensities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    C61; C67; Q52; Armington assumption; Distributed emissions; Minimum output opportunity costs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models
    • 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:eee:enepol:v:122:y:2018:i:c:p:45-62. 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.