IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Border tax adjustments in the climate policy context: CO2 versus broad-based GHG emission targeting

  • Ghosh, Madanmohan
  • Luo, Deming
  • Siddiqui, Muhammad Shahid
  • Zhu, Yunfa

Using a multi-region, multi-sector computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, this paper compares the efficiency, distributional and emission leakage effects of border tax adjustments (BTAs) as part of unilateral climate policies that are based on carbon dioxide (CO2)-only versus those based on all greenhouse gases (GHGs). Simulation results suggest that the broad-based GHG policies in general have lower efficiency costs and result in less re-distributive effects. BTAs bring modest efficiency gains with adverse distributional consequences. The distributional impacts are smaller under broad-based GHG policies compared to that based on CO2 only. However, these are due to a wider variety of abatement options under multi-gas policies rather than the BTAs per se. The main difference between the two policies is distributional effects. First, CO2-only based policies have worse impacts on fossil fuel exporters such as Russia and relatively better outcomes for oil importers such as India and China, compared to that of multi-gas policies particularly when it involves large global emission reduction. Second, sectoral coverage under BTAs also influences the differential outcomes. For example, Brazil is worse impacted under GHG-based policies if agriculture is brought under BTAs as two-third of its emissions are non-CO2 based and agriculture is the primary source of these emissions.

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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988312002198
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Economics.

Volume (Year): 34 (2012)
Issue (Month): S2 ()
Pages: S154-S167

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:s2:p:s154-s167
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:34:y:2012:i:s2:p:s154-s167. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.