IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v60y2013icp667-674.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing climate policies to reduce carbon emissions in China

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Aijun
  • Lin, Boqiang

Abstract

Currently, China is the largest carbon emitter mainly due to growing consumption of fossil fuels. In 2009, the Chinese government committed itself to reducing domestic carbon emissions per unit of GDP by 40–45% by 2020 compared to 2005 levels. Therefore, it is a top priority for the Chinese government to adopt efficient policy instruments to reduce its carbon intensity. Against this background, this paper develops a general equilibrium model and seeks to provide empirical contributions by comparing the potential impacts of several different policy options to reduce China's carbon emissions. The main findings are as follows. Firstly, these climate policies would affect the structure of economy and contribute to carbon emissions reduction and carbon intensity reduction. Secondly, there would be significant differences in the economic and environmental effects among different climate policies and hence, the government would trade-off among different economic objectives to overcome any potential resistances. Thirdly, there would be considerable differences in the emissions effects of absolute and intensity-based carbon emissions controls, implying that the government might adopt different climate policies for absolute or intensity-based carbon emissions controls. Looking ahead, the government should trade-off among different objectives when designing climate reforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Aijun & Lin, Boqiang, 2013. "Comparing climate policies to reduce carbon emissions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 667-674.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:60:y:2013:i:c:p:667-674
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513002942
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.04.041?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. Zhang, ZhongXiang & Baranzini, Andrea, 2004. "What do we know about carbon taxes? An inquiry into their impacts on competitiveness and distribution of income," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 507-518, March.
    2. Aaditya Mattoo & Arvind Subramanian & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe & Jianwu He, 2009. "Reconciling Climate Change and Trade Policy," Working Papers 189, Center for Global Development.
    3. Fisher-Vanden, Karen & Ho, Mun S., 2007. "How do market reforms affect China's responsiveness to environmental policy?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 200-233, January.
    4. Wang, Xin & Li, Ji Feng & Zhang, Ya Xiong, 2011. "An analysis on the short-term sectoral competitiveness impact of carbon tax in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 4144-4152, July.
    5. Lin, Boqiang & Jiang, Zhujun, 2011. "Estimates of energy subsidies in China and impact of energy subsidy reform," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 273-283, March.
    6. Bye, Brita, 2000. "Environmental Tax Reform and Producer Foresight: An Intertemporal Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 719-752, November.
    7. Lu, Chuanyi & Tong, Qing & Liu, Xuemei, 2010. "The impacts of carbon tax and complementary policies on Chinese economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7278-7285, November.
    8. Riedy, Chris & Diesendorf, Mark, 2003. "Financial subsidies to the Australian fossil fuel industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 125-137, January.
    9. Kind, Hans Jarle & Koethenbuerger, Marko & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2008. "Efficiency enhancing taxation in two-sided markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1531-1539, June.
    10. Lin, Boqiang & Li, Aijun, 2011. "Impacts of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on competitiveness across regions in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5111-5118.
    11. Kemfert, Claudia & Welsch, Heinz, 2000. "Energy-Capital-Labor Substitution and the Economic Effects of CO2 Abatement: Evidence for Germany," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 641-660, November.
    12. Wendner, Ronald, 2001. "An applied dynamic general equilibrium model of environmental tax reforms and pension policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 25-50, January.
    13. ANDERSON, KYM & McKIBBIN, WARWICK J., 2000. "Reducing coal subsidies and trade barriers: their contribution to greenhouse gas abatement," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 457-481, October.
    14. Bosello, Francesco & Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2001. "The double dividend issue: modeling strategies and empirical findings," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 9-45, February.
    15. Yan Dong & John Walley, 2012. "How Large Are The Impacts Of Carbon Motivated Border Tax Adjustments?," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(01), pages 1-28.
    16. Ferran Sancho, 2009. "Calibration Of Ces Functions For Real-World Multisectoral Modeling," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 45-58.
    17. Keen, Michael & Lockwood, Ben, 2010. "The value added tax: Its causes and consequences," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 138-151, July.
    18. Li, Aijun & Zhang, Aizhen, 2012. "Will carbon motivated border tax adjustments function as a threat?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 81-90.
    19. Gottinger, Hans W., 1998. "Greenhouse Gas Economics and Computable General Equilibrium," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 537-580, October.
    20. John Whalley & Li Wang, 2007. "Evaluating the Impure Chinese VAT Relative to a Pure Form in a Simple Monetary Trade Model with an Endogenous Trade Surplus," NBER Working Papers 13581, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Jean-Marc Burniaux & Jean Château & Rob Dellink & Romain Duval & Stéphanie Jamet, 2009. "The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: How to Build the Necessary Global Action in a Cost-Effective Manner," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 701, OECD Publishing.
    22. Lin, Boqiang & Li, Aijun, 2012. "Impacts of removing fossil fuel subsidies on China: How large and how to mitigate?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 741-749.
    23. Vedenov, Dmitry & Wetzstein, Michael, 2008. "Toward an optimal U.S. ethanol fuel subsidy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2073-2090, September.
    24. Rivers, Nic, 2010. "Impacts of climate policy on the competitiveness of Canadian industry: How big and how to mitigate?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1092-1104, September.
    25. Lin, Shuanglin, 2008. "China's value-added tax reform, capital accumulation, and welfare implications," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 197-214, June.
    26. Yu, Jun & Zhang, Shunming, 2011. "Optimal trade policy in tariff games with inside money," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 1604-1614, July.
    27. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    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. Lin, Boqiang & Li, Aijun, 2012. "Impacts of removing fossil fuel subsidies on China: How large and how to mitigate?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 741-749.
    2. Li, Aijun & Du, Nan & Wei, Qian, 2014. "The cross-country implications of alternative climate policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 155-163.
    3. Li, Aijun & Zhang, Aizhen & Cai, Hongbo & Li, Xingfeng & Peng, Shishen, 2013. "How large are the impacts of carbon-motivated border tax adjustments on China and how to mitigate them?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 927-934.
    4. 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.
    5. Li, Aijun & Peng, Dan & Wang, Daoping & Yao, Xin, 2017. "Comparing regional effects of climate policies to promote non-fossil fuels in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1998-2012.
    6. Li, Aijun & Zhang, Aizhen, 2012. "Will carbon motivated border tax adjustments function as a threat?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 81-90.
    7. Lin, Boqiang & Jiang, Zhujun, 2011. "Estimates of energy subsidies in China and impact of energy subsidy reform," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 273-283, March.
    8. Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 2012. "Competitiveness and Leakage Concerns and Border Carbon Adjustments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 225-287, December.
    9. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang & Atsagli, Philip, 2016. "Environmental and welfare assessment of fossil-fuels subsidies removal: A computable general equilibrium analysis for Ghana," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 1172-1179.
    10. Ling Tang & Qin Bao & ZhongXiang Zhang & Shouyang Wang, 2015. "Carbon-based border tax adjustments and China’s international trade: analysis based on a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(2), pages 329-360, April.
    11. Jared C. Carbone & Nicholas Rivers, 2014. "Climate policy and competitiveness: Policy guidance and quantitative evidence," Working Papers 2014-05, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.
    12. Alberto Gago & Xavier Labandeira & Xiral López Otero, 2014. "A Panorama on Energy Taxes and Green Tax Reforms," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 145-190, March.
    13. Yang, Mian & Fan, Ying & Yang, Fuxia & Hu, Hui, 2014. "Regional disparities in carbon dioxide reduction from China's uniform carbon tax: A perspective on interfactor/interfuel substitution," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 131-139.
    14. Lin, Boqiang & Li, Aijun, 2011. "Impacts of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on competitiveness across regions in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5111-5118.
    15. Acharya, Rajesh H. & Sadath, Anver C., 2017. "Implications of energy subsidy reform in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 453-462.
    16. Freire-González, Jaume, 2018. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend hypothesis in CGE modelling literature: A critical review," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 194-223.
    17. John Whalley, 2011. "What Role for Trade in a Post‐2012 Global Climate Policy Regime," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(11), pages 1844-1862, November.
    18. Iuliia Ogarenko & Klaus Hubacek, 2013. "Eliminating Indirect Energy Subsidies in Ukraine: Estimation of Environmental and Socioeconomic Effects Using Input–Output Modeling," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 2(1), pages 1-27, December.
    19. Djoni Hartono & Tony Irawan & Ahmad Komarulzaman, 2014. "Energy Pricing Policies in Indonesia: A Computable General Equilibrium Model," EcoMod2014 7344, EcoMod.
    20. Boehringer Christoph & Fischer Carolyn & Rosendahl Knut Einar, 2010. "The Global Effects of Subglobal Climate Policies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-35, December.

    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:60:y:2013:i:c:p:667-674. 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.