Impacts of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on competitiveness across regions in China

Energy

Volumn 36, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 5111-5118

  Lin, Boqiang ^a,b   Li, Aijun ^b  

^a MINJIANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b XIAMEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Carbon leakage; Carbon motivated border tax adjustments; Competitiveness issue; Computable general equilibrium model; Global climate change

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; CLIMATE MODELS; COMMERCE; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; ECONOMICS; REGIONAL PLANNING;

BORDER TAX ADJUSTMENTS; CARBON INTENSITY; CARBON LEAKAGE; COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE; COMPETITIVENESS ISSUE; COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM MODEL; GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM MODELS; GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGES; INDUSTRIAL OUTPUTS; POTENTIAL IMPACTS; REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT; SIMULATION RESULT; STRUCTURE CHANGE;

COMPETITION;

CARBON EMISSION; CLIMATE CHANGE; COMPETITIVENESS; DEVELOPING WORLD; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; EQUILIBRIUM; GLOBAL CHANGE; INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION; NUMERICAL MODEL; POLLUTION TAX; PRICE DYNAMICS; REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT; RELOCATION; TAX SYSTEM;

CHINA;

EID: 79961026037     PISSN: 03605442     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.008     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. United Nations framework convention on climate change 1992, United Nations.
2. Intergovernmental panel on climate change, climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change, summary for policymakers contribution of working group iii to the intergovernmental panel on climate change fourth assessment 2007, Cambridge University Press.
3. Bernard A., Vielle M. Assessment of European Union transition scenarios with a special focus on the issue of carbon leakage. Energy Economics 2009, 31(2):274-284.
4. Markusen J.R. International externalities and optimal tax structures. Journal of International Economics 1975, 5:15-29.
5. Grubb M., Niehoff K. Allocation and competitiveness in the EU emissions trading scheme: policy overview. Climate Policy 2006, 6(1):137-160.
6. Houser T., Bradley R., Childs B., Werksman J., Heilmayr R. Levelingthe carbon playing field: international competition and US climate policy design 2008, Peterson Institute for International Economics and World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.
7. Kuik O., Hofkes M. Border adjustment for European emissions trading: competitiveness and carbon leakage. Energy Policy 2010, 38(4):1741-1748. 1994.
8. Fischer C., Fox K.A. Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage 2009, Resources for the Future Discussion Paper, 09-02.
9. De Cendra J. Can emissions trading schemes be coupled with border tax adjustments? An analysis vis-à-vis WTO law. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law (RECIEL) 2006, 15(2):131-145.
10. van Asselt H., Biermann F. European emissions trading and competitiveness of energy-intensive industries: a legal and political evaluation of possible supporting measures. Energy Policy 2007, 35(1):497-507.
11. Monjon S., Quirion P. How to design a border adjustment for the European Union emissions trading system?. Energy Policy 2010, 38(9):5199-5207.
12. Mattoo A., Subranmanian A., Mensbrugghe van der D., He J.W. Reconciling climate change and trade policy 2009, Working Paper of World Bank.
13. Esty D.C. Greening the GATT: trade, environment, and the future 1994, Institute of International Economics, Washington, DC.
14. Sampson G. WTO rules and climate change: the need for policy coherence. Global climate governance: inter-linkages between the Kyoto protocol and other multilateral regimes 1998, Global Environment Information Centre, Tokyo, Japan.
15. Zhang Z.X., Assunção L. Domestic climate policies and the WTO 2001, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. FEEM, Milan, Italy, Working paper 91.
16. Kommerskollegium Climate and trade rules: harmony or conflict? 2004, National Board of Trade, Stockholm, Sweden.
17. Biermann F., Brohm R. Implementing the Kyoto protocol without the United States: the strategic role of energy tax adjustments at the border, global governance. Climate Policy 2005, 4:289-302.
18. Pauwelyn J.U.S. Federal climate policy and competitiveness concerns: the limits and options of international trade law 2007, Working paper 07-02, Duke University. Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Durham, NC.
19. Brewer T.L. U.S. Climate change policy and international trade policy intersections: issues needing innovation for a rapidly expanding agenda. Paper prepared for a seminar of the center for business and public policy 2008, Georgetown University, Washington.
20. Hoerner J., Muller F. Carbon taxes for climate protection in a competitive world. Ökologisch orientierte Steuerreformen: Die fiskal-und aussenwirtschaftspolitischen Aspekte, Published for Swiss Federal Office for International Economic Affairs 1997, Verlag Paul Haupt, Bern, Switzerland. E. Staehelin-Witt, H. Blöchliger (Eds.).
21. Fischer C., Hoffmann S., Yutaka Y. Multilateral trade agreements and market-based environmental policies. Critical issues in environmental taxation: international and comparative perspectives 2004, 363-384. UK: Richmond Law and Tax Ltd. J. Milne, K. Deketelaere, L. Kreiser, H. Ashiabor (Eds.).
22. Ismer R., Neuhoff K. Border tax adjustments: a feasible way to address nonparticipation in emission trading 2004, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, CMI Working Papers No. 36.
23. van Asselt H., Brewer T. Addressing competitiveness and leakage concerns in climate policy: an analysis of border adjustment measures in the US and the EU. Energy Policy 2010, 1:42-51.
24. Peterson E.B., Joachim S. Economic and environmental effects of border tax adjustments 2007, Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovations Research, Working paper Sustainability and Innovation No. S 1/2007.
25. Dong Y., Whalley J. How large are the impacts of carbon motivated tax adjustments? 2009, NBER, Working Papers No. 15613. Access at. http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/15613.html.
26. Mathiesen L., Maestad O. Climate policy and the steel industry: achieving global emissions reductions by an incomplete climate agreement. Energy Journal 2004, 25(4):91-114.
27. Quirion P., Demailly D. Leakage from climate policies and border tax adjustment: lessons from a geographic model of the cement industry 2006, Working Papers halshs-00009337_v1, HAL.
28. Demailly D., Quirion P. Leakage from climate policies and border tax adjustment: lessons from a geographic model of the cement industry. The design of climate policy 2008, p.333-358. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA. R. Guesnerie, H. Tulkens (Eds.).
29. Lin B.Q., Li A.J. Impacts of carbon motivated border tax adjustments on developing countries. Journal of Financial Research 2010, 12:1-15.
30. Whalley J., Zhang S.M. A numerical simulation analysis of (Hukou) labor mobility restrictions in China. Journal of Development Economics 2007, 83(2):392-410.
31. China statistical yearbook 2008, National Bureau of Statistics of China, China Statistics Press.
32. Sancho F. Calibration of CES functions for real-world multisectoral modeling 2007, Working paper, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 08193-Bellaterra, Catalonia, Spain.
33. World development indicators 2009 2009, World Bank, Washington, D.C.
34. CEIC China database, access at http://site.securities.com/cdmWeb;2007.
35. Handbook of statistics 2009 2009, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, New York and Geneva.
36. Uncomtrade database, access at http://data.un.org/Default.aspx;2007.
37. World energy outlook 2008, IEA, Paris, 2008.
38. World energy outlook 2009, IEA, Paris, 2009b.
39. China energy statistical yearbook 2008 2008, National Bureau of Statistics, China Statistics Press, Beijing.
40. China energy statistical yearbook 2009 2009, National Bureau of Statistics, China Statistics Press, Beijing.
41. Review of world energy June 2009 2009, BP statistical, Access at. mailto:bp.com/statisticalreview.
42. Rendajingjiluntan database, access at http://www.pinggu.org/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=436978&highlight=%2525CD%2525B6%2525C8%2525EB%2525B2%2525FA%2525B3%2525F6%25252B2002%25252B%2525CA%2525A1;2002.
43. Oecd database, access at http://www.oecd.org/document/3/0,%25203343,%2520en_2649_34445_38071427_1_1_1_1,00.html;2005.
44. Multi-regional input-output model for China 2000, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization, Access at. http://www.ide.go.jp/English/Publish/Books/Sds/086.html.
45. Hossein A., Noureddine K. An oil demand and supply model incorporating monetary policy. Energy 2010, 35(5):2013-2021.
46. Huang Y.N., Zhang W., Wang X.J. An econometric estimation and selection on the production function in an environmental CGE model. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 2003, 23(3):350-354.
47. Hertel W.T., McDougall A.R., Narayanan G.B., Aguiar H.A. GTAP 7 database documentation - chapter 14: behavioral parameters 2009, access at. https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/4184.pdf.
48. CO2 emissions from fuel combustion 2009 edition 2009, IEA, Paris.
49. Alexeeva-Talebi V., Böhringer C., Moslener U. Climate and competitiveness: an economic impact assessment of EU leadership in emission control policies 2007, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), Mannheim.
50. Bruvoll A., Fæhn T. Transboundary effects of environmental policy: markets and emission leakages. Ecological Economics 2006, 59(4):499-510.
51. Rivers N. Impacts of climate policy on competitiveness of Canadian industry: how big and how to mitigate?. Energy Economics 2010, 32:1092-1104.