IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/ccepwp/1416.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Much Abatement Will Australia's Emissions Reduction Fund Buy?

Author

Listed:
  • Harry Clarke

    (School of Economics, La Trobe University)

  • Iain Fraser

    (School of Economics, La Trobe University
    University of Kent)

  • Robert Waschik

    (School of Economics, La Trobe University)

Abstract

The economic implications for Australia of replacing its carbon tax policy with an Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) scheme are examined. A computable general equilibrium model is used to show that the budget allocated for the ERF is about 50 per cent of that required to meet Australia's greenhouse gas abatement commitments.

Suggested Citation

  • Harry Clarke & Iain Fraser & Robert Waschik, 2014. "How Much Abatement Will Australia's Emissions Reduction Fund Buy?," CCEP Working Papers 1416, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    • Handle: RePEc:een:ccepwp:1416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccep.crawford.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publication/ccep_crawford_anu_edu_au/2015-11/ccep1416.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fraser, Iain & Waschik, Robert, 2013. "The Double Dividend hypothesis in a CGE model: Specific factors and the carbon base," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 283-295.
    2. Harry Clarke & Robert Waschik, 2012. "Australia's Carbon Pricing Strategies in a Global Context," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(s1), pages 22-37, June.
    3. Stoneham, Gary & Chaudhri, Vivek & Ha, Arthur & Strappazzon, Loris, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria’s BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-24.
    4. Gary Stoneham & Vivek Chaudhri & Arthur Ha & Loris Strappazzon, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria's BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 477-500, December.
    5. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, September.
    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. Paul J. Burke, 2016. "Undermined by Adverse Selection: Australia's Direct Action Abatement Subsidies," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 216-229, September.
    2. Nong, Duy & Meng, Sam & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2017. "An assessment of a proposed ETS in Australia by using the MONASH-Green model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 281-291.
    3. John Freebairn, 2016. "A Comparison of Policy Instruments to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 204-215, September.
    4. Nong, Duy & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2018. "Potential impacts of the Emissions Reduction Fund on the Australian economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 387-398.
    5. Meng, Xianming & Siriwardana, Mahinda & McNeill, Judith, 2015. "Will the direct action plan work?," Conference papers 332602, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Siriwardana, Mahinda & Nong, Duy, 2015. "Australia in an International Emissions Trading (ETS) Scheme: An Economic Evaluation Using the GTAP-E Model," Conference papers 332632, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Meng, Sam & Siriwardana, Mahinda & McNeill, Judith & Nelson, Tim, 2018. "The impact of an ETS on the Australian energy sector: An integrated CGE and electricity modelling approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 213-224.
    8. McNeill, Judith, 2015. "A review of the economic modelling on the impacts of the Australian carbon tax," Conference papers 332598, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Nong, Duy & Simshauser, Paul & Nguyen, Duong Binh, 2021. "Greenhouse gas emissions vs CO2 emissions: Comparative analysis of a global carbon tax," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    10. Nong, Duy, 2020. "Development of the electricity-environmental policy CGE model (GTAP-E-PowerS): A case of the carbon tax in South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    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. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S., 2008. "Quantifying the Benefits of Conservation Auctions: Evidence from an Economic Experiment," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 43, March.
    2. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    3. Cooke, Benjamin & Corbo-Perkins, Gabriella, 2018. "Co-opting and resisting market based instruments for private land conservation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-181.
    4. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    5. Steven Schilizzi & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2012. "Evaluating Conservation Auctions with Unknown Bidder Costs: The Scottish Fishing Vessel Decommissioning Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 658-673.
    6. Comerford, Emma & Binney, Jim, 2006. "Lessons learned from the Queensland Vegetation Incentives Program - applying auction theory to vegetation protection," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 174101, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Chapman, Mollie & Satterfield, Terre & Chan, Kai M.A., 2019. "When value conflicts are barriers: Can relational values help explain farmer participation in conservation incentive programs?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 464-475.
    8. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    9. Md Sayed Iftekhar & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2017. "How well do conservation auctions perform in achieving landscape-level outcomes? A comparison of auction formats and bid selection criteria," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(4), pages 557-575, October.
    10. Toho Hien & Raphaële Preget & Mabel Tidball, 2019. "Les enchères de contrats agroenvironnementaux : comparaison expérimentale entre contrainte d’objectif et contrainte de budget," CEE-M Working Papers hal-02378412, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    11. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    12. M. S. Iftekhar & A. Hailu & R. K. Lindner, 2014. "Does It Pay to Increase Competition in Combinatorial Conservation Auctions?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 62(3), pages 411-433, September.
    13. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill & McCosker, Kevin & Northey, Adam, 2018. "Assessing cost-effectiveness when environmental benefits are bundled: agricultural water management in Great Barrier Reef catchments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(3), July.
    14. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S. & Breustedt, G., 2012. "Auctioning outcome-based conservation contracts," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47, March.
    15. Muñoz-Piña, Carlos & Guevara, Alejandro & Torres, Juan Manuel & Braña, Josefina, 2008. "Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico's forests: Analysis, negotiations and results," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 725-736, May.
    16. Stoneham, Gary & O'Keefe, Andrew & Eigenraam, Mark & Bain, David, 2012. "Creating physical environmental asset accounts from markets for ecosystem conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 114-122.
    17. Banerjee, Simanti & Conte, Marc N., 2017. "Balancing Complexity and Rent-Seeking in Multi-Attribute Conservation Procurement Auctions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266293, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Lewis, David J. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2011. "The efficiency of voluntary incentive policies for preventing biodiversity loss," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 192-211, January.
    19. Balmford, Ben & Collins, Joseph & Day, Brett & Lindsay, Luke & Peacock, James, 2023. "Pricing rules for PES auctions: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2005. "Australasian environmental economics: contributions, conflicts and ‘cop-outs’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    carbon tax; emissions reduction fund; computable general equilibrium model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:een:ccepwp:1416. 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: CCEP (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.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.