IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/fortra/v55y2020i3p277-297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Drivers of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensity Improvements in Major Economies: Analysis of Trends 1995–2009

Author

Listed:
  • Madanmohan Ghosh
  • Deming Luo
  • Muhammad Shahid Siddiqui
  • Thomas Rutherford
  • Yunfa Zhu

Abstract

This article analyses the trends in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity over the period 1995–2009 in a mix of developing and developed economies that account for almost two-thirds of global emissions. From the accounting point of view, it distinguishes between the production-based emissions (PBEs) and consumption or demand-based emissions (DBEs). Several studies find that while PBEs in many developed economies during the last decades have stabilised, the DBEs are on the rise. Understanding the relative influence of various factors that have shaped the different patterns of emissions growth can provide us with important policy insights for controlling GHG emissions. The article undertakes a decomposition exercise to understand the variations/fluctuations in both PBEs and DBEs intensities due to changes in technology and changes in economic structure (i.e., composition of aggregate production and final consumption). The main findings of this article are that, over the period 1995–2009, technological change has been the key driver of emissions intensity improvements in both PBEs and DBEs. Emissions intensity improvements in consumption activities have been slower than production, particularly in EU 27. Structural changes or changes in the composition of aggregate production and demand have relatively smaller contribution in overall intensity improvement. Structural shifts in the economy have somewhat negatively contributed to emissions intensity improvements in Canada and China. In India, structural shifts in both production and consumption activities have contributed significantly to emissions intensity improvements. When taking account of trade, changes in the sources of imports have worked against overall emissions intensity improvements, particularly in the developed economies of Canada, European Union (EU 27) and USA, where imports from relatively emissions intensive sources have increased during the period. JEL: D58, Q56, O13

Suggested Citation

  • Madanmohan Ghosh & Deming Luo & Muhammad Shahid Siddiqui & Thomas Rutherford & Yunfa Zhu, 2020. "The Drivers of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensity Improvements in Major Economies: Analysis of Trends 1995–2009," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 55(3), pages 277-297, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:fortra:v:55:y:2020:i:3:p:277-297
    DOI: 10.1177/0015732520920769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0015732520920769
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0015732520920769?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.
    2. Choi, Ki-Hong & Ang, B. W., 2003. "Decomposition of aggregate energy intensity changes in two measures: ratio and difference," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 615-624, November.
    3. Matthew A. Cole & Robert J.R. Elliott & Kenichi Shimamoto, 2005. "A Note on Trends in European Industrial Pollution Intensities: A Divisia Index Approach," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 61-74.
    4. G. Boyd & J. F. McDonald & M. Ross & D. A. Hansont, 1987. "Separating the Changing Composition of U.S. Manufacturing Production from Energy Efficiency Improvements: A Divisia Index Approach," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 77-96.
    5. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Agarwal, Manmohan, 2014. "Production-based versus consumption-based emission targets: implications for developing and developed economies," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 585-606, October.
    6. Joel F. Bruneau & Steven J. Renzetti, 2009. "Greenhouse Gas Intensity in Canada: A Look at Historical Trends," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Whalley, John, 2007. "Endogenous Effort and Intersectoral Labour Transfers Under Industrialization Approaches," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 22, pages 461-481.
    8. Christoph Bohringer & Jared Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, "undated". "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Working Papers 2013-24, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 11 Oct 2013.
    9. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Luo, Deming & Siddiqui, Muhammad Shahid & Zhu, Yunfa, 2012. "Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 154-167.
    10. Ang, B.W. & Mu, A.R. & Zhou, P., 2010. "Accounting frameworks for tracking energy efficiency trends," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1209-1219, September.
    11. B. W. Ang & Ki-Hong Choi, 1997. "Decomposition of Aggregate Energy and Gas Emission Intensities for Industry: A Refined Divisia Index Method," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 59-73.
    12. Ma, Chunbo & Stern, David I., 2008. "China's changing energy intensity trend: A decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 1037-1053, May.
    13. Schafer, Andreas, 2005. "Structural change in energy use," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 429-437, March.
    14. Rose, A. & Chen, C. Y., 1991. "Sources of change in energy use in the U.S. economy, 1972-1982 : A structural decomposition analysis," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, April.
    15. Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2008. "An Empirical Analysis of Energy Intensity and Its Determinants at the State Level," The Energy Journal, , vol. 29(3), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Zhang, Youguo, 2009. "Structural decomposition analysis of sources of decarbonizing economic development in China; 1992-2006," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2399-2405, June.
    17. Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2001. "Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 877-908, September.
    18. Cornillie, Jan & Fankhauser, Samuel, 2004. "The energy intensity of transition countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-295, May.
    19. Ang, B.W. & Zhang, F.Q., 2000. "A survey of index decomposition analysis in energy and environmental studies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 25(12), pages 1149-1176.
    20. Sue Wing, Ian, 2008. "Explaining the declining energy intensity of the U.S. economy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 21-49, January.
    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. Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank & Schymura, Michael, 2015. "Peeling the onion: Analyzing aggregate, national and sectoral energy intensity in the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 63-75.
    2. Voigt, Sebastian & De Cian, Enrica & Schymura, Michael & Verdolini, Elena, 2014. "Energy intensity developments in 40 major economies: Structural change or technology improvement?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 47-62.
    3. Ghosh, Madanmohan & Luo, Deming & Rutherford, Thomas & Zhu, Yunfa, 2014. "The Drivers of GHG Emissions Intensity Improvements in Major Economies Analysis of Trends 1995-2009," Conference papers 332465, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Michael Schymura & Andreas Löschel, 2012. "Trade and the Environment: An Application of the WIOD Database," EcoMod2012 3948, EcoMod.
    5. Fernández González, P., 2015. "Exploring energy efficiency in several European countries. An attribution analysis of the Divisia structural change index," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 364-374.
    6. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2012. "Structural decomposition analysis applied to energy and emissions: Some methodological developments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 177-188.
    7. Fernández González, P. & Landajo, M. & Presno, M.J., 2013. "The Divisia real energy intensity indices: Evolution and attribution of percent changes in 20 European countries from 1995 to 2010," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 340-349.
    8. Ajayi, V. & Reiner, D., 2018. "European Industrial Energy Intensity: The Role of Innovation 1995-2009," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1835, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. Åsa Löfgren & Adrian Muller, 2010. "Swedish CO 2 Emissions 1993–2006: An Application of Decomposition Analysis and Some Methodological Insights," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(2), pages 221-239, October.
    10. Lars Wenzel & Andr Wolf, 2014. "Changing Patterns of Electricity Usage in European Manufacturing: A Decomposition Analysis," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 4(4), pages 516-530.
    11. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula & Blignaut, James N., 2011. "South Africa’s electricity consumption: A sectoral decomposition analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(12), pages 4779-4784.
    12. Mulder, Peter & de Groot, Henri L.F., 2012. "Structural change and convergence of energy intensity across OECD countries, 1970–2005," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1910-1921.
    13. Kenichi Shimamoto, 2017. "Decomposition analysis of the pollution intensities in the case of the United Kingdom," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1316553-131, January.
    14. Fernández González, P. & Presno, M.J. & Landajo, M., 2015. "Regional and sectoral attribution to percentage changes in the European Divisia carbonization index," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1437-1452.
    15. Arik Levinson, 2017. "Energy Intensity: Prices, Policy, or Composition in US States," Working Papers gueconwpa~17-17-04, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
    16. Ma, Chunbo, 2014. "A multi-fuel, multi-sector and multi-region approach to index decomposition: An application to China's energy consumption 1995–2010," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 9-16.
    17. Fernández-Amador, Octavio & Francois, Joseph F. & Oberdabernig, Doris A. & Tomberger, Patrick, 2023. "Energy footprints and the international trade network: A new dataset. Is the European Union doing it better?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    18. Levinson, Arik, 2021. "Energy intensity: Deindustrialization, composition, prices, and policies in U.S. states," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    19. Tajudeen, Ibrahim A. & Wossink, Ada & Banerjee, Prasenjit, 2018. "How significant is energy efficiency to mitigate CO2 emissions? Evidence from OECD countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 200-221.
    20. Wang, Chunhua, 2013. "Changing energy intensity of economies in the world and its decomposition," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 637-644.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    GHG emissions intensity; demand-based emissions; embodied emissions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:sae:fortra:v:55:y:2020:i:3:p:277-297. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.