IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331065.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economic Effect of Greenhouse Policies in New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Bishop, Phillip
  • Walton, Mark
  • Sundakov, Alex

Abstract

New Zealand’s share of global greenhouse gas emissions, at about one fifth of one percent, is very small. But the profile of those emissions is unique among OECD countries; more than half come from methane and nitrous oxide associated with livestock agriculture. Consequently, fulfilling its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol is potentially quite onerous for New Zealand. In this paper we use a single region, static general equilibrium model to assess the implications for New Zealand of various climate change policy options. The energy and agriculture sectors are modeled in a detailed manner to enable realistic simulations to be carried out. Choosing an optimal set of policies is made more difficult by the fact that New Zealand relies heavily on emission intensive sectors for much of its export earnings. For example, one emission intensive sector alone, dairy, accounts for over 20 percent of all merchandise exports. Avoiding carbon leakage is therefore an important consideration in selecting appropriate greenhouse policies. Our analysis shows the degree of sectoral adjustment required is substantial. In addition, the total costs depend on the uncertain level of variables such as the global carbon price and the level of afforestation activities in New Zealand, i.e. the rate of new forest planting.

Suggested Citation

  • Bishop, Phillip & Walton, Mark & Sundakov, Alex, 2002. "The Economic Effect of Greenhouse Policies in New Zealand," Conference papers 331065, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331065/files/1040.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Alpay, Savas, 2000. "Does Trade Always Harm the Global Environment? A Case for Positive Interaction," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 272-288, April.
    3. Ulph, Alistair, 1996. "Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 265-281, May.
    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. Kriechel, Ben & Ziesemer, Thomas, 2003. "The Environmental Porter Hypothesis as a Technology Adoption Problem?," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Mohr, Robert D., 2002. "Technical Change, External Economies, and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 158-168, January.
    3. J. Neary, 2006. "International Trade and the Environment: Theoretical and Policy Linkages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(1), pages 95-118, January.
    4. Shunsuke Managi & SJames J. Opaluch & Di Jin & Thomas A. Grigalunas, 2005. "Environmental Regulations and Technological Change in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    5. Klein, Martin & Rothfels, Jacqueline, 1999. "Can Environmental Regulation of X-Ineffecient Firms Create a -Double Dividend-?," IWH Discussion Papers 103/1999, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    6. Li, Hong & Huang, Chengming & Yang, Bill Z., 2011. "Environmental Regulation, Business Innovation and International Competitiveness - Regolazione ambientale, innovazioni d’impresa e competitività internazionale," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 64(1), pages 115-128.
    7. Emilio Galdeano-Gómez, 2008. "Does an Endogenous Relationship Exist between Environmental and Economic Performance? A Resource-Based View on the Horticultural Sector," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(1), pages 73-89, May.
    8. Boom, Jan Tjeerd, 2003. "Strategic Choice of Domestic Environmental Policy Instrument and International Emissions Trading Scheme in an Open Economy with Imperfect Competition," Unit of Economics Working Papers 24177, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Food and Resource Economic Institute.
    9. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Salant, Stephen W., 2011. "A free lunch in the commons," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 245-253, May.
    10. Tiziana La Rocca & Maurizio La Rocca & Francesco Fasano & Alfio Cariola, 2023. "Does a country's environmental policy affect the value of small and medium sized enterprises liquidity in the energy sector?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 277-290, January.
    11. Kenneth Rødseth, 2014. "Efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants: a non-parametric approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 211-223, October.
    12. Martin, Ralf, 2009. "Why is the US so energy intensive? Evidence from US multinationals in the UK," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28703, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Dakpo, K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffee, Laure, 2015. "Empirical comparison of pollution generating technologies in nonparametric modelling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French sheep meat farming," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211557, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "DEA environmental assessment in time horizon: Radial approach for Malmquist index measurement on petroleum companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 329-345.
    15. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    16. Massimiliano Cerciello & Francesco Busato & Simone Taddeo, 2023. "The effect of sustainable business practices on profitability. Accounting for strategic disclosure," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 802-819, March.
    17. Thomas P. Lyon & John W. Maxwell, 1999. "Corporate environmental strategies as tools to influence regulation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 189-196, May.
    18. Benchekroun Hassan & Yildiz Halis Murat, 2011. "Free Trade, Autarky and the Sustainability of an International Environmental Agreement," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    19. Phoebe Koundouri & Fabio Antoniou & Panos Hatzipanayotou, 2010. "Tradable Permits vs Ecological Dumping," DEOS Working Papers 1002, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    20. Lu Qiu & Die Hu & Yu Wang, 2020. "How do firms achieve sustainability through green innovation under external pressures of environmental regulation and market turbulence?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2695-2714, September.

    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:ags:pugtwp:331065. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.