IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v34y2006i8p940-949.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The rise and fall of French Ecological Tax Reform: social acceptability versus political feasibility in the energy tax implementation process

Author

Listed:
  • Deroubaix, Jose-Frederic
  • Leveque, Francois

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Deroubaix, Jose-Frederic & Leveque, Francois, 2006. "The rise and fall of French Ecological Tax Reform: social acceptability versus political feasibility in the energy tax implementation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 940-949, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:34:y:2006:i:8:p:940-949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(04)00283-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Xu, Jiayi & Tan-Soo, Jie-Sheng & Chu, Yanlai & Zhang, Xiao-Bing, 2023. "Gasoline price and fuel economy of new automobiles: Evidence from Chinese cities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Vona, Francesco, 2023. "Managing the distributional effects of climate policies: A narrow path to a just transition," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    3. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    4. Hsu, Shi-Ling & Walters, Joshua & Purgas, Anthony, 2008. "Pollution tax heuristics: An empirical study of willingness to pay higher gasoline taxes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 3612-3619, September.
    5. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    6. Ouvrard, Benjamin & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2020. "Nudging Acceptability for Wood Ash Recycling in Forests: A Choice Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    8. María Rodríguez-García & María Guijarro-García & Agustín Carrilero-Castillo, 2019. "An Overview of Ecopreneurship, Eco-Innovation, and the Ecological Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    9. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.
    10. Lin, Boqiang & Jia, Zhijie, 2019. "How does tax system on energy industries affect energy demand, CO2 emissions, and economy in China?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Bourgeois, Cyril & Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Quirion, Philippe, 2021. "Lump-sum vs. energy-efficiency subsidy recycling of carbon tax revenue in the residential sector: A French assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Tomás, Manuel & García-Muros, Xaquín & Alonso-Epelde, Eva & Arto, Iñaki & Rodríguez-Zúñiga, Alejandro & Monge, Cristina & González-Eguino, Mikel, 2023. "Ensuring a just energy transition: A distributional analysis of diesel tax reform in Spain with stakeholder engagement," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    13. Chung-Fu Lai, 2016. "Examining the Double Dividend Effect of Energy Tax with the Overlapping Generations Model," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 6(1), pages 53-57.
    14. Matts Andersson & Lina Jonsson & Karin Brundell-Freij & Katja Berdica, 2023. "Who should pay? Public acceptance of different means for funding transport infrastructure," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1425-1448, August.
    15. Liang, Qiao-Mei & Fan, Ying & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2007. "Multi-regional input-output model for regional energy requirements and CO2 emissions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1685-1700, March.
    16. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2012. "A Political Economy Approach to Resource Taxation: Weak Sustainability, Revenue Recycling and Regional Planning," Working Papers 201202, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    17. Sclen, Håkon & Kallbekken, Steffen, 2011. "A choice experiment on fuel taxation and earmarking in Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2181-2190, September.
    18. Stefano Carattini & Maria Carvalho & Sam Fankhauser, 2018. "Overcoming public resistance to carbon taxes," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(5), September.
    19. Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen & Clau Dermont, 2018. "The unpopularity of incentive-based instruments: what improves the cost–benefit ratio?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 37-62, April.
    20. Dütschke, Elisabeth & Preuß, Sabine & Brunzema, Iska & Piria, Raffaele, 2023. "Using the revenues from carbon pricing - Insights into the acceptance and perceptions of particularly burdened groups," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    21. Yu, Mengyan & Umair, Muhammad & Oskenbayev, Yessengali & Karabayeva, Zhаnsaya, 2023. "Exploring the nexus between monetary uncertainty and volatility in global crude oil: A contemporary approach of regime-switching," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    22. Umit, Resul & Schaffer, Lena Maria, 2020. "Attitudes towards carbon taxes across Europe: The role of perceived uncertainty and self-interest," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    23. Kallbekken, Steffen & Aasen, Marianne, 2010. "The demand for earmarking: Results from a focus group study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2183-2190, September.

    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:eee:enepol:v:34:y:2006:i:8:p:940-949. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.