Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The logic of collective action and Australia’s Climate Policy

Contents:

Author Info

  • Pezzey, John C.V.
  • Mazouz, Salim
  • Jotzo, Frank

Abstract

The Australian Government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), March 2009, set a target of 5 to 15 per cent emission cuts during 2000 and 2020. The proposed target is weak and is likely to increase mitigation costs in Australia in the long run. This research report analyses the target’s efficiency as well as provisions for preventing carbon leakage. The research also looks at the nature of changes to the CPRS made during 2008 as well as the likely cause of these changes. The free allocation of output-linked, tradable permits to Emissions-Intensive, Trade-Exposed (EITE) sectors was much higher than previously proposed and greater than what is needed to prevent carbon leakage. This means EITE emissions could rise by 13 per cent during 2010 and 2020. To meet the proposed national targets, non-EITE sectors must also cut emissions by 34 to 51 per cent (or make equivalent permit imports). This is far from a cost-effective outcome. The weak targets and over-generous EITE assistance illustrate how collective action by the ‘carbon lobby’ can damage economic efficiency. To resist this, new national or international institutions to assess lobby claims impartially are needed. More government publicity about the true economic importance of carbon-intensive sectors is also required. Over-concern that voluntary emission cuts will be nullified by the CPRS is another, different, demonstration of lobby power.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/94824
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub in its series Research Reports with number 94824.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: May 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:eerhrr:94824

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Crawford Building, Lennox Crossing, Building #132, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Email:
Web page: http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: climate policy; Australia; targets; emission trading; carbon leakage; lobbying; Environmental Economics and Policy; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. John C. V. Pezzey & Frank Jotzo & John Quiggen, 2006. "Fiddling while carbon burns: why climate policy needs pervasive emission pricing as well as technology promotion," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0611, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
  2. Weber, Christopher L. & Peters, Glen P., 2009. "Climate change policy and international trade: Policy considerations in the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 432-440, February.
  3. Oikonomou, Vlasis & Patel, Martin & Worrell, Ernst, 2006. "Climate policy: Bucket or drainer?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3656-3668, December.
  4. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521744447 is not listed on IDEAS
  5. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, March.
  6. Carolyn Fischer & Alan K. Fox, 2007. "Output-Based Allocation of Emissions Permits for Mitigating Tax and Trade Interactions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 575-599.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Wood, Peter John & Jotzo, Frank, 2009. "Price Floors for Emissions Trading," Research Reports 94885, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
  2. Andrés J. Drew, 2010. "New rules, new politics, same actors – explaining policy change in the EU ETS," Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Working Papers 29, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
  3. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Tax-Versus-Trading and Free Emission Shares as Issues for Climate Policy Design," Research Reports 95049, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eerhrr:94824. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.