The costs of the Kyoto Protocol in the European Union

Energy Policy

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 459-481

  Viguier, Laurent L ^a,b   Babiker, Mustafa H ^a   Reilly, John M ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Computable general equilibrium model; European union; Kyoto Protocol

Indexed keywords

CARBON MONOXIDE; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; TRANSPORTATION;

KYATO PROTOCOLS;

CLIMATOLOGY;

CARBON EMISSION; ECONOMIC IMPACT; EMISSION CONTROL; EUROPEAN UNION; KYOTO PROTOCOL;

EUROPE;

EID: 0037377685     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00075-7     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. ABARE, 1996. The Megabare Model: Interim Documentation. Canberra, Australia.
2. Babiker, M., Eckaus, R., 2000. Rethinking the Kyoto emissions targets. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 65, Cambridge, MA.
3. Babiker, M., Jacoby, H., 1999. Developing country effects of Kyototype emissions restrictions. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 53, Cambridge, MA.
4. Babiker, M., Reilly, J., Ellerman, A.D., 2000a. Japanese nuclear power and the Kyoto agreement. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 14, 169-188.
5. Babiker, M., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H., 2000b. The Kyoto protocol and developing countries. Energy Policy 28, 525-536.
6. Babiker, M., Bautista, M., Jacoby, H., Reilly, J., 2000c. Effects of differentiating climate policy by sector: a United States example. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 61, Cambridge, MA.
7. Babiker, M., Reilly, J., Eckaus, R.S., Sue Wing, I., 2000d. The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model: Revisions, Sensitivities, and Comparisons of Results. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Cambridge, MA.
8. Babiker, M., Viguier, L., Ellerman, A., Reilly, J., Criqui, P., 2001. Welfare impacts of hybrid climate policies in the European Union. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 74, Cambridge, MA.
9. Babiker, M., Jacoby, H., Reilly, J., Reiner, D., 2002. The evolution of a climate regime: Kyoto to Marrakech. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 82, Cambridge, MA.
10. Blanchard, O., Criqui, P., Trommetter, M., Viguier, L., 2000. Au-delà de Kyoto: enjeux d'équité et d'efficacité dans la négociation sur le changement climatique. Economie et Prévision 143-144, 15-36.
11. Blok, K., Phylipsen, G.J.M., 1996. National Circumstances of EU Member States Related to Greenhouse Gas Emission Limitation and Reduction. Department of Science, Technology and Society, Utrecht, Netherlands.
12. Blok, K., de Jager, D., Hendriks, C., 2001. Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change. Summary Report for Policy Makers, DG Environment, Brussels, Belgium.
13. Brown, S., Kennedy, D., Polidano, C., Woffenden, K., Jakeman, G., Graham, B., Jotzo, F., Fisher, B.S. 1999. Economic impacts of the Kyoto Protocol-accounting for the three major greenhouse gases. ABARE Research, Report 99.6, Canberra, Australia.
14. Capros, P., Mantzos, L., 1999. Analysis for EUSectors and Member-States by Using the PRIMES Ver.2 Energy System Model. NTUA, Athens, Greece.
15. Capros, P., Mantzos, L., 2000. The Economic Effects of EU-Wide Industry-Level Emission Trading to Reduce Greenhouse Gases: Results Form Primes Energy Systems Model. NTUA for the European Commission, Athens, Greece.
16. Capros, P., Mantzos, L., Sedee, C., Strengers, B., 2000. European Environmental Priorities: An Environmental and Economic Assessment. NTUA for the European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Athens, Greece.
17. 2 emission permits systems: a proposal for ceilings on quantities and prices. Working Paper 18, IEPE, Grenoble, France.
18. 2 reduction under flexibility mechanisms and technical progress. International Journal of Global Energy Issues 14, 155-168.
19. Criqui, P. et al. 1996. POLES 2.2. JOULE II Programme, European Commission DG XVII-Science Research Development, Bruxelles.
20. 2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the Poles model. Energy Policy 27, 585-601.
21. Criqui, P., Mima, S., Viguier, L., 1999b. Les permis d'émission négociables: enjeux et perspectives dans le cadre de la négociation sur le climat. Futuribles 255, 25-48.
22. Energy Information Administration, 1997. World Energy Projection System: Model Documentation. Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting. US Department of Energy, Washington, DC, DOE/ EIA-M050(97).
23. EIA, 2000. International Energy Outlook 2000. US Department of Energy, Washington, DC, DOE/EIA-0484(2000).
24. Ellerman, A.D., 2000. Tradable permits for greenhouse gas emissions: a primer with particular reference to Europe. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 69, Cambridge, MA.
25. 2 emissions trading using marginal abatement curves. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 40, Cambridge, MA.
26. Ellerman, A.D., Sue Wing, I., 2000. Supplementarity: an invitation for monopsony? MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 59, Cambridge, MA.
27. European Commission, 1999. European energy outlook to 2020: The Shared Analysis Project. Directorate General for Energy, Brussels, Belgium.
28. European Commission, 2000. EUpolicies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: Towards a European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament, Brussels, Belgium.
29. Eurostat, 1999. Consumption Expenditures of Private Households in the European Union. Luxembourg.
30. Hertel, T.W., 1997. Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
31. International Energy Agency, 1998a. Energy Statistics of OECD Countries 1995-1996. Paris, France.
32. IEA, 1998b. Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1995-1996. Paris, France.
33. IEA, 2000. Energy Prices and Taxes, third quarter 1999. Paris, France.
34. International Monetary Fund, 2000. World Economic Outlook. Washington, DC.
35. Jacoby, H.D., Sue Wing, I., 1999. Adjustment time, capital malleability and policy cost. In: Weyant, J.P., Hill, J. (Eds.), The Energy Journal Special Issue: The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation. International Association for Energy Economics, Cleveland, pp. 73-92.
36. 2 emissions limits: economic adjustments and the distribution of burdens. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 9, Cambridge, MA.
37. Jotzo, F., Polidano, C., Heyhoe, E., Jakeman, G., Tupulpé, V., Woffenden, K., 2000. Climate change policy and the European Union: emission reduction strategies and international policy options. ABARE Research, Report 2000.12, Canberra, Australia.
38. Polidano, C., Jotzo, F., Heyhoe, E., Jakeman, G., Woffenden, K., Fisher, B.S., 2000. The Kyoto Protocol and developing countries: impacts and implications for mechanism design. ABARE Research, Report 2000. 4, Canberra, Australia.
39. Reilly, J., Prinn, R.G., Harnisch, J., Fitzmaurice, J., Jacoby, H., Kicklighter, D., Stone, P., Sokolov, A., Wang C., 1999.Multi-gas assessment of the Kyoto Protocol. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 45, Cambridge, MA.
40. Ringius, L., 1997. Differentiation, leaders and fairness: negotiating climate commitments in the European Community. Center for International Climate and Environment Research, Report No. 8, Oslo, Norway.
41. UNFCCC, 2000. National communications from Parties included in Annex I to the Convention: greenhouse gas inventory data from 1990 to 1998. Subsidiary Body for Implementation, FCCC/SBI/ 2000/11, Lyon, France.
42. Uranium Information Centre, 2001. Germany's Nuclear Energy. Nuclear Issues Brie.ng Paper 46, July 2001.
43. 2 in transition economies: emission inventories and Divisia Index Analysis. The Energy Journal 20 (2), 59-87.
44. Viguier, L., 2001. Fair trade and harmonization of climate policies in Europe. Energy Policy 29 (10), 749-753.
45. Weyant, J.P., Hill, J., 1999. Introduction and overview. In: Weyant, J.P., Hill, J. (Eds.), The Energy Journal Special Issue: The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation. International Association for Energy Economics, Cleveland, pp. vii-xliv.