IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332641.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Environmental Impacts of Coal Subsidies in Turkey: A Regional General Equilibrium Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Acar, Sevil
  • Yeldan, A. Erinc

Abstract

In this study we aim at providing an analytical quest for Turkey to study the true social costs of the existing coal subsidization scheme and identifying viable alternative policy instruments and economic measures to complement its e¤orts of further greening and de-carbonizing its economy. To this end we develop an applied general equilibrium model and utilize both macro and micro level data to assess the impact of the current arsenal of energy policy instruments (in particular coal subsidies) and public policy intervention mechanisms to accelerate technology adoption and achieve higher employment, energy security, and sustainable growth patterns. Spanning over 2015-2030, our analytical apparatus focuses exclusively on considering the …scal implications as well as the environmental repercussions of the CO2 and other gaseous emissions and the relevant market instruments of abatement. With the aid of a set of alternative policy scenarios against a “business as usual” path, we study the aggregate and sectorial performances of growth, employment, investment and capital accumulation, consumption/welfare and trade balance.

Suggested Citation

  • Acar, Sevil & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2015. "Environmental Impacts of Coal Subsidies in Turkey: A Regional General Equilibrium Analysis," Conference papers 332641, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332641
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332641/files/7412.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brännlund, Runar & Lundgren, Tommy, 2009. "Environmental policy without costs? A review of the Porter hypothesis," Umeå Economic Studies 766, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    2. World Bank, 2013. "Turkey Green Growth Policy Paper : Towards a Greener Economy," World Bank Publications - Reports 16088, The World Bank Group.
    3. Brännlund, Runar & Lundgren, Tommy, 2009. "Environmental policy without costs? A review of the Porter hypothesis," Sustainable Investment and Corporate Governance Working Papers 2009/1, Sustainable Investment Research Platform.
    4. Akın Olçum, Gökçe & Yeldan, Erinç, 2013. "Economic impact assessment of Turkey's post-Kyoto vision on emission trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 764-774.
    5. Lans Bovenberg, A. & de Mooij, Ruud A., 1994. "Environmental taxes and labor-market distortions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 655-683, December.
    6. Brannlund, Runar & Lundgren, Tommy, 2009. "Environmental Policy Without Costs? A Review of the Porter Hypothesis," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(2), pages 75-117, September.
    7. Kumbaroglu, Gurkan Selcuk, 2003. "Environmental taxation and economic effects: a computable general equilibrium analysis for Turkey," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 795-810, November.
    8. Philippe Aghion & Julian Boulanger & Elie Cohen, 2011. "Rethinking industrial policy," Policy Briefs 566, Bruegel.
    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. Kolsuz, Gunes & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2017. "Economics of climate change and green employment: A general equilibrium investigation for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1240-1250.
    2. Aziz Bouzaher & Sebnem Sahin & Erinç Yeldan, 2015. "HOW TO GO GREEN: a general equilibrium investigation of environmental policies for sustained growth with an application to Turkey’s economy," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 49-76, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Kumbhakar, Subal C. & Badunenko, Oleg & Willox, Michael, 2022. "Do carbon taxes affect economic and environmental efficiency? The case of British Columbia’s manufacturing plants," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Valadkhani, Abbas & Roshdi, Israfil & Smyth, Russell, 2016. "A multiplicative environmental DEA approach to measure efficiency changes in the world's major polluters," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 363-375.
    6. Mitesh Kataria, 2010. "The Role of Preferences in Disagreements over Scientific Hypothesis: An Empirical Inquiry into Environmental and Economic Decision Making," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-088, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Andries, Petra & Daou, Alain & Verheyden, Laura, 2019. "Innovation as a vehicle for improving socially vulnerable groups’ access to basic provisions: A research note on the development of a questionnaire module," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 281-288.
    8. Shreekant Gupta & Bishwanath Goldar & Shubham Dang, 2019. "Environmental Performance And Capital Markets--Evidence From India," Working papers 303, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    9. Anabel Zárate-Marco & Jaime Vallés-Giménez, 2015. "Environmental tax and productivity in a decentralized context: new findings on the Porter hypothesis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 313-339, October.
    10. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    11. Thanh Tam Nguyen-Huu & Minh Nguyen-Khac & Quoc Tran-Nam, 2017. "The role of environmental regulations and innovation in TFP convergence: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs in Vietnam," WIDER Working Paper Series 092, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Petra Andries & Ute Stephan, 2019. "Environmental Innovation and Firm Performance: How Firm Size and Motives Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, June.
    13. R. De Santis & P. Esposito & C. Jona Lasinio, 2021. "Environmental regulation and productivity growth: Main policy challenges," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 165, pages 264-277.
    14. Jana Stoever & John P. Weche, 2018. "Environmental Regulation and Sustainable Competitiveness: Evaluating the Role of Firm-Level Green Investments in the Context of the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(2), pages 429-455, June.
    15. Rexhäuser, Sascha & Rammer, Christian, 2011. "Unmasking the Porter hypothesis: Environmental innovations and firm-profitability," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-036, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Dominique Bianco, 2022. "Does entrepreneurial behaviour matter for the strong Porter hypothesis?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 42(2), pages 867-876.
    17. Tommy Lundgren & Per-Olov Marklund, 2015. "Climate policy, environmental performance, and profits," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 225-235, December.
    18. Xie, Rong-hui & Yuan, Yi-jun & Huang, Jing-jing, 2017. "Different Types of Environmental Regulations and Heterogeneous Influence on “Green” Productivity: Evidence from China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 104-112.
    19. Bostian, Moriah & Färe, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Lundgren, Tommy, 2016. "Environmental investment and firm performance: A network approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 243-255.
    20. André, Francisco J., 2015. "Strategic Effects and the Porter Hypothesis," MPRA Paper 62237, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:332641. 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.