IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332940.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic and environmental implications of a target for bioplastics consumption: A CGE analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Escobar, Neus
  • Haddad, Salwa
  • Britz, Wolfgang

Abstract

Bioplastic production is a small but fast growing sector in the Bioeconomy despite the so far limited policy support. We simulate the expansion of bioplastic supply towards a 5% target relative to current total plastic consumption in leading producing regions. We introduce fossil-based plastics and bioplastics in the GTAP 9 database, coupled to greenhouse gas (GHG) indicators; then simulate two policy scenarios, where scenario 1 subsidizes bioplastics consumption, while scenario 2 increases taxes on fossil plastics. Both alternatives promote bioplastic production, with subsequent price effects due to the increase in demand for starch- and sugar-based feedstocks at global scale. The tax in scenario 2 makes plastics as an aggregate more expensive, leading to a contraction of all sectors that employ plastics either directly or indirectly. Global real GDP stays almost constant in scenario 1, but drops by 0.07% in scenario 2, implying greater distortions by differentiated taxation of a larger sector. Our study is the first to quantify emissions from indirect Land Use Change (iLUC) due to growing bioplastics demand. Given the current production technologies relying on food crops, the target triggers cropland expansion and increased GHG emissions globally. The latter increase by +1.44% in scenario 1 and by +2.07% in scenario 2, where a greater loss of carbon stocks from managed forest areas is observed, due to the lower wood demand for energy and material uses in other sectors. The cost-effectiveness of the bioplastic target is calculated at -14.53 and -61.59 US$ per t CO2-eq. for scenarios 1 and 2, respectively. We show that CGE models are useful to analyze economic and environmental impacts of Bioeconomy transformations and more generally the food-fuel-fiber debate. Future bioplastic strategies should focus on biodegradability rather than on the biological origin of the feedstock, in order to drive the transition to resource-efficient and low-carbon economies.

Suggested Citation

  • Escobar, Neus & Haddad, Salwa & Britz, Wolfgang, 2018. "Economic and environmental implications of a target for bioplastics consumption: A CGE analysis," Conference papers 332940, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332940/files/9057.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keeney, Roman & Thomas Hertel, 2005. "GTAP-AGR : A Framework for Assessing the Implications of Multilateral Changes in Agricultural Policies," GTAP Technical Papers 1869, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    2. Oecd, 2013. "Policies for Bioplastics in the Context of a Bioeconomy," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers 10, OECD Publishing.
    3. Burniaux, Jean-Marc & Truong Truong, 2002. "GTAP-E: An Energy-Environmental Version of the GTAP Model," GTAP Technical Papers 923, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    4. Burniaux, Jean-March & Truong, Truong P., 2002. "Gtap-E: An Energy-Environmental Version Of The Gtap Model," Technical Papers 28705, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Taofeeq D. Moshood & Gusman Nawanir & Fatimah Mahmud & Fazeeda Mohamad & Mohd Hanafiah Ahmad & Airin Abdul Ghani, 2021. "Expanding Policy for Biodegradable Plastic Products and Market Dynamics of Bio-Based Plastics: Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.

    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. 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).
    2. Britz, Wolfgang & Li, Jingwen & Shang, Linmei, 2021. "Combining large-scale sensitivity analysis in Computable General Equilibrium models with Machine Learning: An Example Application to policy supporting the bio-economy," Conference papers 333285, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Francesco Bosello & Lorenza Campagnolo & Raffaello Cervigni & Fabio Eboli, 2018. "Climate Change and Adaptation: The Case of Nigerian Agriculture," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(4), pages 787-810, April.
    4. Michetti, Melania & Parrado, Ramiro, 2012. "Improving Land-use modelling within CGE to assess Forest-based Mitigation Potential and Costs," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 122862, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Haddad, Salwa & Britz, Wolfgang & Börner, Jan, 2017. "Impacts Of Increased Forest Biomass Demand In The European Bioeconomy," 57th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 13-15, 2017 261986, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    6. Dixon, Peter B. & Rimmer, Maureen T., 2009. "Simulating the U.S. recession," Conference papers 331862, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Jun Yang & Huanguang Qiu & Jikun Huang & Scott Rozelle, 2008. "Fighting global food price rises in the developing world: the response of China and its effect on domestic and world markets," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(s1), pages 453-464, November.
    8. Alvaro Calzadilla & Katrin Rehdanz & Richard S.J. Tol, 2008. "The Eonomic Impact Of More Sustainable Water Use In Agriculture: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," Working Papers FNU-169, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Dec 2008.
    9. Arndt Feuerbacher & Jonas Luckmann, Humboldt-University of Berlin, 2017. "Modelling field operations in a computable general equilibrium model: An application to labour shortages in Bhutan," EcoMod2017 10464, EcoMod.
    10. Eboli, Fabio & Parrado, Ramiro & Roson, Roberto, 2010. "Climate-change feedback on economic growth: explorations with a dynamic general equilibrium model," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(5), pages 515-533, October.
    11. Yujing Niu & Wenying Chen & Zongxin Wu, 2013. "The Economic and Environmental Impact on China of Carbon Tariffs Based on Gage Model," Energy & Environment, , vol. 24(7-8), pages 1295-1307, December.
    12. Alvaro Calzadilla & Katrin Rehdanz & Richard Betts & Pete Falloon & Andy Wiltshire & Richard Tol, 2013. "Climate change impacts on global agriculture," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 357-374, September.
    13. Siriwardana, Mahinda & Meng, Sam & McNeill, Judith, 2013. "Border Adjustments under Unilateral Carbon Pricing: Are they Warranted in the Case of Australian Carbon Tax?," Conference papers 332357, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Mörsdorf, George, 2022. "A simple fix for carbon leakage? Assessing the environmental effectiveness of the EU carbon border adjustment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    15. Kuiper, Marijke, 2007. "What if not all land is created equal? The role of heterogeneous land when assessing the impact of trade liberalization on developing countries," Conference papers 331658, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Huang, Jikun & Yang, Jun & Msangi, Siwa & Rozelle, Scott & Weersink, Alfons, 2012. "Biofuels and the poor: Global impact pathways of biofuels on agricultural markets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 439-451.
    17. B. Henderson & A. Golub & D. Pambudi & T. Hertel & C. Godde & M. Herrero & O. Cacho & P. Gerber, 2018. "The power and pain of market-based carbon policies: a global application to greenhouse gases from ruminant livestock production," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 349-369, March.
    18. Calzadilla, Alvaro & Rehdanz, Katrin & Tol, Richard S.J., 2008. "Water scarcity and the impact of improved irrigation management: A CGE analysis," Conference papers 331788, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Banse, M. & Sorda, G., 2010. "Impact of Different Biofuel Policy Options on Agricultural Production and Land Use in Germany," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, March.
    20. Misak Avetisyan & Thomas Hertel & Gregory Sampson, 2014. "Is Local Food More Environmentally Friendly? The GHG Emissions Impacts of Consuming Imported versus Domestically Produced Food," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 415-462, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:pugtwp:332940. 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.