IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i6p2190-2204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental climate instruments in Romania: A comparative approach using dynamic CGE modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Loisel, Rodica

Abstract

This study simulates a CO2 permit market in Romania using a dynamic general equilibrium model. The carbon constraint is set at 20.7% below the reference emissions level for sectors eligible according to the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). Free permit distribution enhances growth despite a severe emissions cap, because environmental regulation stimulates structural changes [Porter, M., 1991. American's green strategy. Scientific American 264, 168]. That is, grandfathering allows sectors additional resources to invest in developing technologies, but it also raises the CO2 abatement costs because of energy rebound effects from enhanced growth. Results under endogenous growth [Romer, P.M., 1990. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98 (5), 71-102] are very similar to those obtained under an exogenous growth scenario [Ramsey, Y.F., 1928. A mathematical theory of saving. Economic Journal 38, 543-559], as the substitution effects are responsible for the majority of variations; in addition, Romanian research activities are too modest to significantly impact this system. The abatement cost per unit of GDP is higher under endogenous growth, as spillover effects reduce incentives to invest. Technological diffusion continues to have a positive impact on economic growth, which counterbalances the free-riding attitude adopted by some energy-intensive sectors, such as glass and cement.

Suggested Citation

  • Loisel, Rodica, 2009. "Environmental climate instruments in Romania: A comparative approach using dynamic CGE modelling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2190-2204, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:2190-2204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00081-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-1037, October.
    2. Robert J. Barro, 2013. "Inflation and Economic Growth," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 14(1), pages 121-144, May.
    3. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    4. McKibbin, Warwick J. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 1998. "The theoretical and empirical structure of the G-Cubed model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 123-148, January.
    5. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Endogenous Product Cycles," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1214-1229, September.
    6. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    7. Otto, Vincent M. & Löschel, Andreas & Reilly, John, 2008. "Directed technical change and differentiation of climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2855-2878, November.
    8. Lawrence H. Goulder, 1994. "Environmental Taxation and the "Double Dividend:" A Reader's Guide," NBER Working Papers 4896, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2001. "Productivité et réglementation environnementale: une analyse de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0104, GREEN.
    10. M. Ha-Duong & M. J. Grubb & J.-C. Hourcade, 1997. "Influence of socioeconomic inertia and uncertainty on optimal CO2-emission abatement," Nature, Nature, vol. 390(6657), pages 270-273, November.
    11. Lau, Morten I. & Pahlke, Andreas & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2002. "Approximating infinite-horizon models in a complementarity format: A primer in dynamic general equilibrium analysis," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 577-609, April.
    12. Bohringer, Christoph & Rutherford, Thomas F., 1997. "Carbon Taxes with Exemptions in an Open Economy: A General Equilibrium Analysis of the German Tax Initiative," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 189-203, February.
    13. Manne, Alan & Richels, Richard, 2004. "The impact of learning-by-doing on the timing and costs of CO2 abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 603-619, July.
    14. Baker, Erin & Clarke, Leon & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Technical change and the marginal cost of abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2799-2816, November.
    15. Jonathan Kohler, Michael Grubb, David Popp and Ottmar Edenhofer, 2006. "The Transition to Endogenous Technical Change in Climate-Economy Models: A Technical Overview to the Innovation Modeling Comparison Project," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 17-56.
    16. Nordhaus, William D., 1993. "Rolling the 'DICE': an optimal transition path for controlling greenhouse gases," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 27-50, March.
    17. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    18. Hiro Lee & Joaquim Oliveira Martins & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 1994. "The OECD Green Model: An Updated Overview," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 97, OECD Publishing.
    19. Bohringer, Christoph & Loschel, Andreas & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2007. "Decomposing the integrated assessment of climate change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 683-702, February.
    20. David Cass, 1965. "Optimum Growth in an Aggregative Model of Capital Accumulation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 32(3), pages 233-240.
    21. Kemfert, Claudia & Welsch, Heinz, 2000. "Energy-Capital-Labor Substitution and the Economic Effects of CO2 Abatement: Evidence for Germany," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 641-660, November.
    22. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    23. Shilpa Rao, Ilkka Keppo and Keywan Riahi, 2006. "Importance of Technological Change and Spillovers in Long-Term Climate Policy," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 123-140.
    24. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    25. David Popp, 2002. "Induced Innovation and Energy Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 160-180, March.
    26. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Mathai, Koshy, 2000. "Optimal CO2 Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-38, January.
    27. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Endogenous Product Cycles," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1214-1229, September.
    28. Buonanno, Paolo & Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2003. "Endogenous induced technical change and the costs of Kyoto," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 11-34, February.
    29. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 abatement policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 211-253, August.
    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. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    2. Kiuila, O. & Rutherford, T.F., 2013. "The cost of reducing CO2 emissions: Integrating abatement technologies into economic modeling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 62-71.
    3. Lin Yang & Yunfei Yao & Jiutian Zhang & Xian Zhang & Karl J. McAlinden, 2016. "A CGE analysis of carbon market impact on CO2 emission reduction in China: a technology-led approach," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(2), pages 1107-1128, March.
    4. Feng, Shenghao & Zhang, Keyu, 2018. "Fuel-factor nesting structures in CGE models of China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 274-284.
    5. Lin Yang & Yunfei Yao & Jiutian Zhang & Xian Zhang & Karl McAlinden, 2016. "A CGE analysis of carbon market impact on CO 2 emission reduction in China: a technology-led approach," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(2), pages 1107-1128, March.
    6. Jaskólski, Marcin, 2016. "Modelling long-term technological transition of Polish power system using MARKAL: Emission trade impact," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 365-377.
    7. Mahmood, Arshad & Marpaung, Charles O.P., 2014. "Carbon pricing and energy efficiency improvement -- why to miss the interaction for developing economies? An illustrative CGE based application to the Pakistan case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 87-103.
    8. Jia Liu & Jizu Li & Xilong Yao, 2019. "The Economic Effects of the Development of the Renewable Energy Industry in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, May.

    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. Rodica Loisel, 2009. "Environmental climate instruments in Romania: A comparative approach using dynamic CGE modelling," Post-Print halshs-00441491, HAL.
    2. Weber, Michael & Barth, Volker & Hasselmann, Klaus, 2005. "A multi-actor dynamic integrated assessment model (MADIAM) of induced technological change and sustainable economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 306-327, August.
    3. Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Nicita, Lea & Massetti, Emanuele & Verdolini, Elena, 2010. "Environmental Policy and Technical Change: A Survey," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 163-219, October.
    4. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    5. Wei Jin, 2012. "Can Technological Innovation Help China Take on Its Climate Responsibility? A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," CAMA Working Papers 2012-51, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    6. Bibas, Ruben & Méjean, Aurélie & Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem, 2015. "Energy efficiency policies and the timing of action: An assessment of climate mitigation costs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 137-152.
    7. Jones, Larry E. & Manuelli, Rodolfo E., 1997. "The sources of growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 75-114, January.
    8. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    9. Magrini, Stefano, 2004. "Regional (di)convergence," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 62, pages 2741-2796, Elsevier.
    10. Patrick Artus, 1993. "Croissance endogène : revue des modèles et tentatives de synthèse," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 44(2), pages 189-228.
    11. Warr, Benjamin & Ayres, Robert, 2006. "REXS: A forecasting model for assessing the impact of natural resource consumption and technological change on economic growth," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 329-378, September.
    12. Mare Sarr & Joëlle Noailly, 2017. "Innovation, Diffusion, Growth and the Environment: Taking Stock and Charting New Directions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(3), pages 393-407, March.
    13. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2007. "Measuring the value of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5287-5297, November.
    14. Ricci, Francesco, 2007. "Channels of transmission of environmental policy to economic growth: A survey of the theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 688-699, February.
    15. Boucekkine, R. & Martínez, B. & Ruiz-Tamarit, J.R., 2013. "Growth vs. level effect of population change on economic development: An inspection into human-capital-related mechanisms," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 312-334.
    16. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    17. Hatice KÜÇÜKKAYA, 2017. "EUREFE’17 International Conference," Turkish Economic Review, KSP Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 343-344, September.
    18. Baker, Erin & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Uncertainty and endogenous technical change in climate policy models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2817-2828, November.
    19. Ilkhom SHARIPOV, 2016. "ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE EU’S EaP COUNTRIES: DETERMINANTS AND PROSPECTS," EURINT, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 3, pages 169-187.
    20. Pizer, William A. & Popp, David, 2008. "Endogenizing technological change: Matching empirical evidence to modeling needs," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2754-2770, November.

    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:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:6:p:2190-2204. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.