Search results

Emerging economies like China and India have contributed a large share in the recent growth in global CO2 emissions, yet these countries are at a different level of economic development than industrialized countries. This dissertation asks the question of how emerging economies can contribute to international climate policies by analyzing existing and proposed policy measures. For the long run, an international regime is necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. After reviewing the literature on how different regimes would affect China and India, the impacts of one particular regime are analyzed numerically in a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model with respect to their consequences on China and India. For India, effects of the proposed policy on different household types are discussed. Furthermore, the impact of uncertainty in key abatement technologies is taken into account. For the medium run, unilateral climate policy might prevail and border carbon adjustments are proposed in order to avoid loss of competitiveness and carbon leakage. Incentives for setting certain carbon tariff rates are studied and the uncertainty in measuring emissions embodied in trade is shown, taking China as an example. Finally, a current policy measure is discussed. Taking a closer look at China, the determinants for technology transfer in the Clean Development Mechanism are analyzed. ; Schwellenländer wir China und Indien haben zuletzt einen Großteil des globalen Wachstums der CO2-Emission beigetragen - diese Länder sind jedoch auf einem anderen ökonomischen Entwicklungsstand als Industrieländer Diese Dissertation setzt sich mit der Frage auseinander, wie Schwellenländer zu internationaler Klimapolitik beitragen können und analysiert existierende und vorgeschlagene Politikmaßnahmen. In der langen Frist ist ein internationales Klimaregime unabdingbar, um gefährlichen Klimawandel zu vermeiden. Eine Literaturübersicht gibt zunächst Aufschluss darüber, wie verschiedene solcher Regime China und Indien beeinflussen würden, bevor die Auswirkungen eines Regimes auf China und Indien genauer in einem berechenbaren allgemeinen Gleichgewichtsmodell betrachtet werden. Für Indien werden dabei die Effekte auf verschiedene Haushaltstypen diskutiert. Zudem werden die Auswirkungen von Unsicherheiten in Schlüsseltechnologien zur CO2-Vermeidung untersucht. Mittelfristig ist jedoch keine globale Klimapolitik zu erwarten. Sich möglicherweise daraus ergebene Wettbewerbsnachteile oder Verlagerung von Emissionen konnten "Klimazölle" entgegenwirken. Die Anreize, bestimmte Zollsätze zu verwenden, werden untersucht und die Unsicherheiten der Messung von impliziten grenzüberschreitenden CO2-Flüssen am Beispiel Chinas diskutiert. Abschließend wird eine existierende Politikmaßnahme untersucht. Dabei werden die Determinanten für Technologietransfer in Projekten des Clean Development Mechanism in China bestimmt.

This policy brief presents a long term assessment of low-carbon energies including renewables, nuclear and fossil energy with CCS. It targets the electricity sector from a global to a regional perspective and from centralized to decentralized energy systems. The policy brief aims at finding answers to the following questions: What role can and should renewable energy play in the next decades on the way to a low-carbon energy future? What is the optimal electricity mix (now and in the future)? What are the impli-cations of the optimal mix regarding renewable energy investment and policy? What framework would be needed to enhance international coordination?

AbstractIn order to significantly reduce global carbon emissions, it is necessary also to control CO2 emissions in fast growing emerging economies such as India. The question is how the Indian economy would be affected by including the country in an international climate regime. In this analysis we soft-link a global and a single-country computable general equilibrium model in order to be able to capture distributional issues as well as international repercussions. We analyze different options of transferring revenues from domestic carbon taxes and international transfers to different household types and the effects of different assumptions on exchange rates on transfer payments. Our results show (i) that welfare effects can differ significantly for different household types, which is generally ignored in analyses with global models, and (ii) that these effects are significantly influenced by international price repercussions and by accounting for transfers from international permit sales which is generally ignored in single-country models.

Concerns about industry competitiveness and distributional impacts can deter ambitious climate policies. Typically, these issues are studied separately, without giving much attention to the interaction between the two. Here, we explore how carbon leakage reduction measures affect distributional outcomes across households within 11 European countries by combining an economy-wide computable general equilibrium model with a household-level microsimulation model. Quantitative simulations indicate that a free allocation of emission permits to safeguard the competitive position of energy-intensive trade-exposed industries leads to impacts that are slightly more regressive than under full auctioning. We identify three channels that contribute to this effect: higher capital and labour income; lower tax revenue for compensating low-income households; and stronger consumption price increases following from higher carbon prices needed to reach the same emissions target. While these findings suggest a competitiveness-equity trade-off, the results also show that redistributing the revenues from partial permit auctioning on an equal-per-household basis still ensures that climate policy is progressive, indicating that there is room for policy to reconcile competitiveness and equity concerns. Finally, we illustrate that indexing social benefits to consumer price changes mitigates pre-revenue-recycling impact regressivity, but is insufficient to compensate vulnerable households in the absence of other complementary measures.

Concerns about industry competitiveness and distributional impacts can deter ambitious climate policies. Typically, these issues are studied separately, without giving much attention to the interaction between the two. Here, we explore how carbon leakage reduction measures affect distributional outcomes across households within 11 European countries by combining an economy-wide computable general equilibrium model with a household-level microsimulation model. Quantitative simulations indicate that a free allocation of emission permits to safeguard the competitive position of energy-intensive trade-exposed industries leads to impacts that are slightly more regressive than under full auctioning. We identify three channels that contribute to this effect: higher capital and labour income; lower tax revenue for compensating low-income households; and stronger consumption price increases following from higher carbon prices needed to reach the same emissions target. While these findings suggest a competitiveness-equity trade-off, the results also show that redistributing the revenues from partial permit auctioning on an equal-per-household basis still ensures that climate policy is progressive, indicating that there is room for policy to reconcile competitiveness and equity concerns. Finally, we illustrate that indexing social benefits to consumer price changes mitigates pre-revenue-recycling impact regressivity, but is insufficient to compensate vulnerable households in the absence of other complementary measures.

Modelling and projecting consumption, investment and government demand by detailed commodities in CGE models poses many data and methodological challenges. We review the state of knowledge of modelling consumption of commodities (price and income elasticities and demographics), as well as the historical trends that we should be able to explain. We then discuss the current approaches taken in CGE models to project the trends in demand at various levels of commodity disaggregation. We examine the pros and cons of the various approaches to adjust parameters over time or using functions of time and suggest a research agenda to improve modelling and projection. We compare projections out to 2050 using LES, CES and AIDADS functions in the same CGE model to illustrate the size of the differences. In addition, we briefly discuss the allocation of total investment and government demand to individual commodities. ; Modelling and projecting consumption, investment and government demand by detailed commodities in CGE models poses many data and methodological challenges. We review the state of knowledge of modelling consumption of commodities (price and income elasticities and demographics), as well as the historical trends that we should be able to explain. We then discuss the current approaches taken in CGE models to project the trends in demand at various levels of commodity disaggregation. We examine the pros and cons of the various approaches to adjust parameters over time or using functions of time and suggest a research agenda to improve modelling and projection. We compare projections out to 2050 using LES, CES and AIDADS functions in the same CGE model to illustrate the size of the differences. In addition, we briefly discuss the allocation of total investment and government demand to individual commodities.

Modelling and projecting consumption, investment and government demand by detailed commodities in CGE models poses many data and methodological challenges. We review the state of knowledge of modelling consumption of commodities (price and income elasticities and demographics), as well as the historical trends that we should be able to explain. We then discuss the current approaches taken in CGE models to project the trends in demand at various levels of commodity disaggregation. We examine the pros and cons of the various approaches to adjust parameters over time or using functions of time and suggest a research agenda to improve modelling and projection. We compare projections out to 2050 using LES, CES and AIDADS functions in the same CGE model to illustrate the size of the differences. In addition, we briefly discuss the allocation of total investment and government demand to individual commodities.