IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jpolmo/v30y2008i2p321-340.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economics of environmental policy in Turkey: A general equilibrium investigation of the economic evaluation of sectoral emission reduction policies for climate change

Author

Listed:
  • Telli, Çagatay
  • Voyvoda, Ebru
  • Yeldan, Erinç

Abstract

Research on climate change has intensified on a global scale as evidence on the costs of global warming continues to accumulate. Confronted with such evidence, the European Union set in late 2006 an ambitious target to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, by 2020, to 20% below the level of 1990; and invited the rest of the developed economies and the developing world to take part with the Kyoto Protocol. Turkey is the only country that appears in the Annex-I list of the United Nations' Rio Summit and yet an official target for CO2 emission reductions has still not been established. Thus, as part of its accession negotiations with the EU, Turkey will likely to face significant pressures to introduce its national plan on climate change along with specific emission targets and the associated abatement policies. Given this motivation, we utilize a computable general equilibrium model for Turkey to study the economic impacts of the intended policy scenarios of compliance with the Kyoto Protocol and we report on the general equilibrium effects of various possible environmental abatement policies in Turkey over the period 2006-2020. The model is in the Walrasian tradition with 10 production sectors and a government operating within an open macroeconomy environment. It accommodates flexible production functions, imperfect substitution in trade and open unemployment. We focus on CO2 emissions and distinguish various basic sources of gaseous pollution in the model. Our results suggest that the burden of imposing emission control targets and the implied abatement costs could be quite high, and that there is a need to finance the expanded abatement investments from scarce domestic resources. Policies for environmental abatement via carbon and/or increased energy taxes further suffer from very adverse employment effects. This suggests that a first-best policy would necessarily call for a simultaneous reduction on the existing tax burden on producers elsewhere together with introduction of environmental taxes.

Suggested Citation

  • Telli, Çagatay & Voyvoda, Ebru & Yeldan, Erinç, 2008. "Economics of environmental policy in Turkey: A general equilibrium investigation of the economic evaluation of sectoral emission reduction policies for climate change," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 321-340.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jpolmo:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:321-340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161-8938(07)00021-X
    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. Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Lawrence H. Goulder, 2002. "When Can Carbon Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 25, pages 471-503, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Joseph E. Aldy & Scott Barrett & Robert N. Stavins, 2003. "Thirteen plus one: a comparison of global climate policy architectures," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 373-397, December.
    4. Kumbaroglu, Gurkan Selcuk, 2003. "Environmental taxation and economic effects: a computable general equilibrium analysis for Turkey," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 795-810, November.
    5. Boratav, Korkut & Turel, Oktar & Yeldan, Erinc, 1996. "Dilemmas of structural adjustment and environmental policies under instability: Post-1980 Turkey," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 373-393, February.
    6. Ian W.H. Parry & Wallace E. Oates & Ian W.H. Parry & Wallace E. Oates, 2004. "Policy Analysis in the Presence of Distorting Taxes," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 4, pages 67-77, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Lise, Wietze, 2006. "Decomposition of CO2 emissions over 1980-2003 in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(14), pages 1841-1852, September.
    8. Agenor, Pierre-Richard & Jensen, Henning Tarp & Verghis, Mathew & Yeldan, Erinc, 2006. "Disinflation, fiscal sustainability, and labor market adjustment in Turkey," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3804, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Pizer, William A., 2006. "The Economics of Climate Change," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-06, Resources for the Future.
    2. Ian W.H. Parry, 2005. "Fiscal Interactions and the Costs of Controlling Pollution from Electricity," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(4), pages 849-869, Winter.
    3. William K. Jaeger, 2002. "Carbon Taxation When Climate Affects Productivity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 354-367.
    4. Mathur, Aparna & Morris, Adele C., 2014. "Distributional effects of a carbon tax in broader U.S. fiscal reform," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 326-334.
    5. Cameron Hepburn, 2006. "Regulation by Prices, Quantities, or Both: A Review of Instrument Choice," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 226-247, Summer.
    6. Marc Vielle & Alain L. Bernard, 1998. "Un exemple d'utilisation : le coût de politiques de réduction des gaz à effet de serre," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 136(5), pages 33-48.
    7. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    8. Brita Bye & Karine Nyborg, 1999. "The Welfare Effects of Carbon Policies: Grandfathered Quotas versus Differentiated Taxes," Discussion Papers 261, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    9. Govinda R. Timilsina & Ram M. Shrestha, 2002. "General equilibrium analysis of economic and environmental effects of carbon tax in a developing country: case of Thailand," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 5(3), pages 179-211, September.
    10. Lori Bennear & Robert Stavins, 2007. "Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 111-129, May.
    11. Dissou, Yazid, 2005. "Cost-effectiveness of the performance standard system to reduce CO2 emissions in Canada: a general equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 187-207, October.
    12. Parry, Ian W. H. & Williams III, Roberton C., 1999. "A second-best evaluation of eight policy instruments to reduce carbon emissions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 347-373, August.
    13. Lawrence Goulder, 2007. "Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Increased U.S. Gasoline Taxes," Discussion Papers 07-009, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    14. Parry, Ian, 2015. "Designing Fiscal Policy to Address the External Costs of Energy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 8(1), pages 1-56, May.
    15. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2001. "The Effect of Allowance Allocation on the Cost of Carbon Emission Trading," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-30-, Resources for the Future.
    16. Botor, Benjamin & Böcker, Benjamin & Kallabis, Thomas & Weber, Christoph, 2021. "Information shocks and profitability risks for power plant investments – impacts of policy instruments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Llop Llop, Maria, 2016. "A second-best analysis of alternative instruments for the preservation of natural resources?," Working Papers 2072/261533, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    19. H. Allen Klaiber & V. Kerry Smith, 2013. "Developing general equilibrium benefit analyses for social programs: an introduction and example," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 6, pages 194-246, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Fullerton, Don & Ta, Chi L., 2019. "Environmental policy on the back of an envelope: A Cobb-Douglas model is not just a teaching tool," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(S1).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jpolmo:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:321-340. 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/inca/505735 .

    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.