IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i9p4766-4773.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Avoiding adverse employment effects from electricity taxation in Norway: What does it cost?

Author

Listed:
  • Bjertnæs, Geir H.

Abstract

Welfare analyses of energy taxes typically show that systems with uniform rates perform better than differentiated systems. However, most western countries include some exemptions for their energy-intensive export industries and thereby avoid this potential welfare gain. Böhringer and Rutherford (1997) find that uniform taxation of carbon emissions in combination with a wage subsidy preserves jobs in these industries at a lower welfare cost compared with a differentiated system. The wage subsidy scheme generates a substantial welfare gain per job saved. This study, however, finds that welfare costs are substantial when less accurate policy measures, represented by production-dependent subsidies, protect jobs in Norwegian electricity-intensive industries. The welfare cost per job preserved by this subsidy scheme amounts to approximately 60% of the wage cost per job, suggesting that these jobs are expensive to preserve. A uniform electricity tax combined with production-dependent subsidies preserves jobs at a lower welfare cost compared with the current differentiated electricity tax system.

Suggested Citation

  • Bjertnæs, Geir H., 2011. "Avoiding adverse employment effects from electricity taxation in Norway: What does it cost?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4766-4773, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:9:p:4766-4773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511005052
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tor Jakob Klette, 1999. "Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 451-476, December.
    2. Herman Vollebergh & Jan Vries & Paul Koutstaal, 1997. "Hybrid carbon incentive mechanisms and political acceptability," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(1), pages 43-63, January.
    3. repec:bla:jindec:v:47:y:1999:i:4:p:451-76 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. R. G. Lipsey & Kelvin Lancaster, 1956. "The General Theory of Second Best," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 24(1), pages 11-32.
    5. Bjertnæs, Geir H. & Fæhn, Taran, 2008. "Energy taxation in a small, open economy: Social efficiency gains versus industrial concerns," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2050-2071, July.
    6. A. Lans Bovenberg & Lawrence H. Goulder, 2001. "Neutralizing the Adverse Industry Impacts of CO2 Abatement Policies: What Does It Cost?," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, pages 45-90, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Richter, Wolfram F. & Schneider, Kerstin, 2003. "Energy taxation: Reasons for discriminating in favor of the production sector," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 461-476, June.
    8. Bohringer, Christoph & Rutherford, Thomas F., 1997. "Carbon Taxes with Exemptions in an Open Economy: A General Equilibrium Analysis of the German Tax Initiative," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 189-203, February.
    9. Bowitz, Einar & Cappelen, Adne, 2001. "Modeling income policies: some Norwegian experiences 1973-1993," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 349-379, August.
    10. Felder, Stefan & Schleiniger, Reto, 2002. "Environmental tax reform: efficiency and political feasibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 107-116, August.
    11. Brita Bye & Karine Nyborg, 2003. "Are Differentiated Carbon Taxes Inefficient? A General Equilibrium Analysis," The Energy Journal, , vol. 24(2), pages 95-113, April.
    12. Stefan Felder & Reto Schleiniger, "undated". "Environmental Tax Reform: Efficiency and Political Feasibility," IEW - Working Papers 013, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    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. Geir H. Bjertnæs, 2005. "Avoiding Adverse Employment Effects from Energy Taxation: What does it cost?," Discussion Papers 432, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Bjertnæs, Geir H. & Fæhn, Taran, 2008. "Energy taxation in a small, open economy: Social efficiency gains versus industrial concerns," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2050-2071, July.
    3. Geir H. Bjertnæs & Taran Fæhn & Jørgen Aasness, 2008. "Designing an electricity tax system in presence of international regulations and multiple public goals: An empirical assessment," Discussion Papers 555, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    4. Bjertnæs, Geir H. & Fæhn, Taran & Aasness, Jørgen, 2008. "Designing an electricity tax system in presence of international regulations and multiple public goals: An empirical assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3723-3733, October.
    5. Bjertnæs, Geir H. & Tsygankova, Marina & Martinsen, Thomas, 2013. "Norwegian climate policy reforms in the presence of an international quota market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 147-158.
    6. A. Lans Bovenberg & Lawrence H. Goulder, 2001. "Neutralizing the Adverse Industry Impacts of CO2 Abatement Policies: What Does It Cost?," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, pages 45-90, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Geir H. Bjertnæs & Taran Fæhn, 2004. "Energy Taxation in a Small, Open Economy: Efficiency Gains under Political Restraints," Discussion Papers 387, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    8. Torstein Bye & Erling Holmϕy, 2010. "Removing Policy-based Comparative Advantage for Energy Intensive Production: Necessary Adjustments of the Real Exchange Rate and Industry Structure," The Energy Journal, , vol. 31(1), pages 177-198, January.
    9. Hickson, Allister, 2006. "Motor vehicle insurance rating with pseudo emissions coverage," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 146-159, June.
    10. Kirchner, Mathias & Sommer, Mark & Kratena, Kurt & Kletzan-Slamanig, Daniela & Kettner-Marx, Claudia, 2019. "CO2 taxes, equity and the double dividend – Macroeconomic model simulations for Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 295-314.
    11. Liang, Qiao-Mei & Fan, Ying & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2007. "Carbon taxation policy in China: How to protect energy- and trade-intensive sectors?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 311-333.
    12. Cathrine Hagem & Michael Hoel & Thomas Sterner, 2020. "Refunding Emission Payments: Output-Based Versus Expenditure-Based Refunding," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 641-667, November.
    13. Adrien Vogt-Shilb & Guy Meunier & Stephane Hallegate, 2013. "Should marginal abatement costs differ across sectors? The effect of low-carbon capital accumulation," Working Papers hal-02805382, HAL.
    14. Pezzey, John C.V., 2001. "Distributing the Value of a Country’s Tradeable Carbon Permits," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 125832, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Bornstein, Nicholas & Lanz, Bruno, 2008. "Voting on the environment: Price or ideology? Evidence from Swiss referendums," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 430-440, October.
    16. Andrea Kollmann & Friedrich Schneider, 2010. "Why Does Environmental Policy in Representative Democracies Tend to Be Inadequate? A Preliminary Public Choice Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(12), pages 1-25, November.
    17. Ghesla, Claus & Grieder, Manuel & Schmitz, Jan & Stadelmann, Marcel, 2020. "Pro-environmental incentives and loss aversion: A field experiment on electricity saving behavior," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    18. Anger, Niels & Böhringer, Christoph & Lange, Andreas, 2006. "Differentiation of Green Taxes: A Political-Economy Analysis for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-003, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Herman Vollebergh, 2004. "Lessons from the Polder: Is Dutch CO2-Taxation Optimal?," Working Papers 2004.6, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. Jollands, Nigel, 2006. "Concepts of efficiency in ecological economics: Sisyphus and the decision maker," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 359-372, March.

    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:39:y:2011:i:9:p:4766-4773. 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.