Optimally differentiated carbon prices for unilateral climate policy

Energy Economics

Volumn 45, Issue , 2014, Pages 304-312

  Boeters, Stefan ^a  

^a CPB NETHERLANDS BUREAU FOR ECONOMIC POLICY ANALYSIS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Carbon price differentiation; Climate policy; Computable general equilibrium model; Optimal taxation; Uniform carbon price

Indexed keywords

CARBON; COSTS; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; TAXATION;

CARBON PRICE; CLIMATE POLICY; COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM; COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM MODEL; INTERMEDIATE INPUTS; INTERNATIONAL MARKETS; OPTIMAL TAXATION; SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS;

CLIMATE MODELS;

CARBON EMISSION; COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; NUMERICAL MODEL; CARBON; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLLUTION TAX; PRICING POLICY;

EID: 84907367556     PISSN: 01409883     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2014.07.015     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Badri N.G., Walmsley T.L. Global trade, assistance, and production: the GTAP 7 data base. Center for Global Trade Analysis 2008, Purdue University.
2. Baumol W.J., Bradford D.F. Optimal departures from marginal cost pricing. Am. Econ. Rev. 1970, 60:265-283.
3. Boeters S., Koornneef J. Supply of renewable energy sources and the cost of EU climate policy. Energy Econ. 2011, 33:1024-1034.
4. Böhringer C., Alexeeva-Talebi V. Unilateral climate policy and competitiveness: economic implications of differential emission pricing. World Econ. 2013, 36:121-154.
5. Böhringer C., Rutherford T.F., Tol R.S.J. The EU 20/20/2020 targets: an overview of the EMF 22 assessment. Energy Econ. 2009, (Supplement 2):268-273. (International, U.S. and E.U. Climate Change Control Scenarios: Results from EMF 22).
6. Böhringer C., Balistreri E.J., Rutherford T.F. The role of border carbon adjustment in unilateral climate policy: overview of an energy modeling forum study (EMF 29). Energy Econ. 2012, 34(Supplement 2):S97-S110. (The Role of Border Carbon Adjustment in Unilateral Climate Policy: Results from EMF 29).
7. Böhringer C., Lange A., Rutherford T.F. Optimal emission pricing in the presence of international spillovers: decomposing leakage and terms-of-trade motives. J. Public Econ. 2014, 110:101-111.
8. Bovenberg A.L. Green tax reform and the double dividend: an updated reader's guide. Int. Tax Public Financ. 1999, 6:421-443.
9. Ferris M.C., Dirkse S.P., Meeraus A. Mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints: automatic reformulation and solution via constrained optimization. Applied General Equilibrium Modeling. In Honor of Herbert Scarf 2005, 67-93. Cambridge University Press. T.J. Kehoe (Ed.).
10. Hoel M. Should a carbon tax be differentiated across sectors?. J. Public Econ. 1996, 59:17-32.
11. Lejour A., Veenendaal P., Verweij G., van Leeuwen N. WorldScan: a model for international economic policy analysis. CPB Document 2006, 111. Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, Den Haag.
12. Lipsey R.G., Lancaster K. The general theory of second best. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1956, 24:11-32.
13. Markusen J. International externalities and optimal tax structures. J. Int. Econ. 1975, 5:15-29.
14. OECD OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 2008, OECD, Paris.
15. Paltsev S., Reilly J.M., Jacoby H.D., Eckaus R.S., McFarland J., Sarofim M., Asadoorian M., Babiker M. The MIT emissions prediction and policy analysis (EPPA) model: version 4. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change Report 2005, 125.
16. Parry I.W.H., Small K.A. Does Britain or the United States have the right gasoline tax?. Am. Econ. Rev. 2005, 95:1276-1289.
17. Rutherford T.F. Extensions of GAMS for complementarity problems arising in applied economic analysis. J. Econ. Dyn. Control. 1995, 19:1299-1324.