IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332330.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sectoral aggregation bias in the accounting of emissions embodied in trade and consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Da
  • Caron, Justin
  • Winchester, Niven
  • Karplus, Valerie J.

Abstract

Correctly accounting for the emissions embodied in consumption and trade is essential to effective climate policy design. Robust methods are needed for both policy and research—for example, the assignment of border carbon adjustments (BCAs) and emissions reduction responsibilities rely on the consistency and accuracy of such estimates. This analysis investigates the potential magnitude and consequences of the bias present in estimates of emissions embodied in trade and consumption. To quantify the bias of embodied-emissions accounting, we compare the results from the disaggregated Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP 8) data set which contains 57 sectors to results from different levels of aggregation of this dataset (3, 7, 16 and 26 sectors) using 5,000 randomly generated sectoral aggregation schemes as well as aggregations generated using several commonly-applied decisions rules. We find that some commonlyapplied decision rules for sectoral aggregation can produce a large bias. We further show that an aggregation scheme that clusters sectors according to their emissions and trade intensities can minimize bias in embodied emissions accounting at different levels of aggregation. This sectoral aggregation principle can be readily used in any input-output analysis and provide useful information for computable general equilibrium modeling exercises in which sector aggregation is necessary, although our findings suggest that, when possible, the most disaggregated data available should be used.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Da & Caron, Justin & Winchester, Niven & Karplus, Valerie J., 2013. "Sectoral aggregation bias in the accounting of emissions embodied in trade and consumption," Conference papers 332330, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332330/files/6192.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Su, Bin & Huang, H.C. & Ang, B.W. & Zhou, P., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of sector aggregation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 166-175, January.
    2. Gordon H. Hanson & Robert C. Feenstra, 2000. "Aggregation Bias in the Factor Content of Trade: Evidence from U.S. Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 155-160, May.
    3. Rausch, Sebastian & Metcalf, Gilbert E. & Reilly, John M., 2011. "Distributional impacts of carbon pricing: A general equilibrium approach with micro-data for households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(S1), pages 20-33.
    4. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
    5. Caron, Justin, 2012. "Estimating carbon leakage and the efficiency of border adjustments in general equilibrium — Does sectoral aggregation matter?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 111-126.
    6. Manfred Lenzen & Lise-Lotte Pade & Jesper Munksgaard, 2004. "CO2 Multipliers in Multi-region Input-Output Models," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 391-412.
    7. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2010. "Input-output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The effects of spatial aggregation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 10-18, November.
    8. Manfred Lenzen, 2011. "Aggregation Versus Disaggregation In Input-Output Analysis Of The Environment," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 73-89.
    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. Piñero, Pablo & Heikkinen, Mari & Mäenpää, Ilmo & Pongrácz, Eva, 2015. "Sector aggregation bias in environmentally extended input output modeling of raw material flows in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 217-229.
    2. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2014. "Attribution of changes in the generalized Fisher index with application to embodied emission studies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 778-786.
    3. Misato Sato, 2014. "Embodied Carbon In Trade: A Survey Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 831-861, December.
    4. Boya Zhang & Shukuan Bai & Yadong Ning & Tao Ding & Yan Zhang, 2020. "Emission Embodied in International Trade and Its Responsibility from the Perspective of Global Value Chain: Progress, Trends, and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-26, April.
    5. Qi, Tianyu & Winchester, Niven & Karplus, Valerie J. & Zhang, Xiliang, 2014. "Will economic restructuring in China reduce trade-embodied CO2 emissions?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 204-212.
    6. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W. & Low, Melissa, 2013. "Input–output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade and the driving forces: Processing and normal exports," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 119-125.
    7. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2011. "Multi-region input–output analysis of CO2 emissions embodied in trade: The feedback effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 42-53.
    8. Maaike Bouwmeester & Jan Oosterhaven, 2013. "Specification and Aggregation Errors in Environmentally Extended Input–Output Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 307-335, November.
    9. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Lin, Jianyi & Hu, Yuanchao & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Shi, Longyu & Kang, Jiefeng, 2017. "Developing a city-centric global multiregional input-output model (CCG-MRIO) to evaluate urban carbon footprints," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 460-466.
    11. Eivind Lekve Bjelle & Johannes Többen & Konstantin Stadler & Thomas Kastner & Michaela C. Theurl & Karl-Heinz Erb & Kjartan-Steen Olsen & Kirsten S. Wiebe & Richard Wood, 2020. "Adding country resolution to EXIOBASE: impacts on land use embodied in trade," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.
    12. Jing Li & Hong Fang & Siran Fang & Zhiming Zhang & Pengyuan Zhang, 2021. "Embodied Energy Use in China’s Transportation Sector: A Multi-Regional Input–Output Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Su, Bin & Ang, B.W., 2022. "Improved granularity in input-output analysis of embodied energy and emissions: The use of monthly data," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    14. Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, Xiaoyong & Xu, Qing & Wu, Fei & Wang, Qunwei & Zha, Donglan, 2018. "Regional embodied carbon emissions and their transfer characteristics in China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 180-193.
    15. Liu, Lirong & Huang, Guohe & Baetz, Brian & Huang, Charley Z. & Zhang, Kaiqiang, 2019. "Integrated GHG emissions and emission relationships analysis through a disaggregated ecologically-extended input-output model; A case study for Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 97-109.
    16. Banie Naser Outchiri, 2020. "Contributing to better energy and environmental analyses: how accurate are decomposition analysis results?," Cahiers de recherche 20-11, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    17. Hawkins, Jacob & Ma, Chunbo & Schilizzi, Steven & Zhang, Fan, 2015. "Promises and pitfalls in environmentally extended input–output analysis for China: A survey of the literature," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 81-88.
    18. Anke Schaffartzik & Dominik Wiedenhofer & Nina Eisenmenger, 2015. "Raw Material Equivalents: The Challenges of Accounting for Sustainability in a Globalized World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-26, April.
    19. David Font Vivanco & Ranran Wang & Edgar Hertwich, 2018. "Nexus Strength: A Novel Metric for Assessing the Global Resource Nexus," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(6), pages 1473-1486, December.
    20. Zeng, Lin & Xu, Ming & Liang, Sai & Zeng, Siyu & Zhang, Tianzhu, 2014. "Revisiting drivers of energy intensity in China during 1997–2007: A structural decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 640-647.

    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:332330. 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.