IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecsysr/v21y2009i3p291-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CARBON AND LAND USE ACCOUNTING FROM A PRODUCER'S AND A cONSUMER'S PERSPECTIVE - AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION COVERING THE WORLD

Author

Listed:
  • Harry Wilting
  • Kees Vringer

Abstract

National policies for reducing environmental pressures stemming from emissions and the use of natural resources usually adopt a producer approach, i.e. the legislation refers to pressures occurring within the territorial boundaries of a country. An alternative approach to environmental accounting is the consumer approach, which includes environmental pressures associated with imports for domestic consumption, wherever these pressures occur. The carbon footprint, for example, is such an approach, in which CO2 or greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are considered from a consumer's perspective. The consumer approach may offer new ways for policies to reduce pressures, and therefore it would be interesting to adopt this perspective in national environmental policy-making and international negotiations. To gain insight into the differences between the approaches, this paper discusses the concepts of both, showing the results of an empirical analysis and going into the application of the two different perspectives in (international) environmental policies. Due to international trade, the environmental pressures accounted for in a producer's and a consumer's perspective are usually not the same for a country. This paper presents a worldwide overview, comparing the outcomes for the two approaches with regard to GHG emissions and land use, for 12 world regions. Furthermore, for GHG emissions, a quantitative comparison was made between 87 countries and regions covering the world. Consumption-related GHG emissions and land use per capita were calculated with a full multi-regional input-output (MRIO) model. MRIO analysis is an attractive method for footprint analyses in an international context. The research shows that, for most developed countries, GHG emissions and land use are higher in the consumer approach than in the producer approach. For most developing countries, the opposite is true. Before applying national targets to the consumer approach - for instance, in climate policies - further improvements and standardisation of methodology and data will be necessary.

Suggested Citation

  • Harry Wilting & Kees Vringer, 2009. "CARBON AND LAND USE ACCOUNTING FROM A PRODUCER'S AND A cONSUMER'S PERSPECTIVE - AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION COVERING THE WORLD," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 291-310.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ecsysr:v:21:y:2009:i:3:p:291-310
    DOI: 10.1080/09535310903541736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09535310903541736
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09535310903541736?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. Lee, Huey-Lin & Hertel, Thomas W. & Sohngen, Brent & Ramankutty, Navin, 2005. "Towards An Integrated Land Use Database for Assessing the Potential for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation," Technical Papers 283423, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Paul Veenendaal & Ton Manders, 2008. "Border tax adjustment and the EU-ETS, a quantitative assessment," CPB Document 171, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    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. van Asselt, Harro & Brewer, Thomas, 2010. "Addressing competitiveness and leakage concerns in climate policy: An analysis of border adjustment measures in the US and the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 42-51, January.
    2. repec:ces:ifodic:v:10:y:2012:i:3:p:19069672 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Hertel, Thomas W. & Tyner, Wallace E. & Birur, Dileep K., 2008. "Biofuels for all? Understanding the Global Impacts of Multinational Mandates," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6526, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Erwin Corong & Thomas Hertel & Robert McDougall & Marinos Tsigas & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2017. "The Standard GTAP Model, version 7," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 2(1), pages 1-119, June.
    5. Melanie Hecht & Wolfgang Peters, 2019. "Border Adjustments Supplementing Nationally Determined Carbon Pricing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 93-109, May.
    6. Parrado, Ramiro & De Cian, Enrica, 2014. "Technology spillovers embodied in international trade: Intertemporal, regional and sectoral effects in a global CGE framework," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 76-89.
    7. Hermann Lotze‐Campen & Christoph Müller & Alberte Bondeau & Stefanie Rost & Alexander Popp & Wolfgang Lucht, 2008. "Global food demand, productivity growth, and the scarcity of land and water resources: a spatially explicit mathematical programming approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(3), pages 325-338, November.
    8. Johannes Bollen & Corjan Brink & Paul Koutstaal & Paul Veenendaal & Herman Vollebergh, 2012. "Trade and Climate Change: Leaking Pledges," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(03), pages 44-51, November.
    9. Venmans, Frank, 2012. "A literature-based multi-criteria evaluation of the EU ETS," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5493-5510.
    10. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Schünemann, Franziska & Heimann, Tobias & Delzeit, Ruth & Söder, Mareike, 2021. "Yet Another Reform of EU Biofuel Policies: Impacts of the Latest Reform of the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315399, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Weiguang Chen & Qing Guo, 2017. "Assessing the Effect of Carbon Tariffs on International Trade and Emission Reduction of China’s Industrial Products under the Background of Global Climate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Bosello, Francesco & Davide, Marinella & Alloisio, Isabella, 2016. "Economic Implications of EU Mitigation Policies: Domestic and International Effects," EIA: Climate Change: Economic Impacts and Adaptation 234938, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    14. Rahel Aichele, 2013. "Trade, Climate Policy and Carbon Leakage - Theory and Empirical Evidence," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 49.
    15. Heerman, Kari E.R. & Zahniser, Steven, 2017. "Trade and production impacts of rolling back NAFTA's agricultural preferences: An application of the systematic heterogeneity general equilibrium gravity model," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 265401, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Birur, Dileep K. & Beach, Robert H. & Hertel, Thomas W. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2010. "Global Implications of U.S. Biofuels Policies in an Integrated Partial and General Equilibrium Framework," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61812, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. HUBERT Marie-Hélène & MOREAUX Michel, 2007. "The challenge of meeting the future food needs," LERNA Working Papers 07.17.238, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    18. 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.
    19. Peter Egger & Sergey Nigai, 2015. "Energy Demand and Trade in General Equilibrium," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(2), pages 191-213, February.
    20. Thaeripour, Farzad & Hertel, Thomas W. & Tyner, Wallace E. & Beckman, Jayson F. & Birur, Dileep K., 2008. "Biofuels and their By-Products: Global Economic and Environmental Implications," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6452, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    21. Onno Kuik, 2014. "REDD+ and international leakage via food and timber markets: a CGE analysis," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 641-655, August.

    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:taf:ecsysr:v:21:y:2009:i:3:p:291-310. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CESR20 .

    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.