IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v39y2013icp283-295.html

The Double Dividend hypothesis in a CGE model: Specific factors and the carbon base

Author

Listed:
  • Fraser, Iain
  • Waschik, Robert

Abstract

We use a Computable General Equilibrium model to empirically examine the Double Dividend (DD) hypothesis. Using the GTAP model data for Australia, we examine three environmental taxes on the production of energy goods. Following Bento and Jacobsen (2007), we examine the role played by specific factors in the production of energy goods. Our results provide support for the existence of a strong DD in Australia when revenue is recycled through reductions in consumption taxes. The strong DD is larger when the share of specific factors is higher, and is much more pronounced when carbon taxes are charged on the production (origin-based accounting) rather than the usage (destination-based accounting) of carbon. These results draw attention to the importance of the definition of the carbon base and have implications for the scale of carbon leakage.

Suggested Citation

  • Fraser, Iain & Waschik, Robert, 2013. "The Double Dividend hypothesis in a CGE model: Specific factors and the carbon base," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 283-295.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:39:y:2013:i:c:p:283-295
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2013.05.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988313000972
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.05.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akay, Gokhan H., 2012. "Trade and factor returns: Empirical evidence from U.S. economy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 77-86.
    2. Ian W. H. Parry, 2003. "Fiscal Interactions and the Case for Carbon Taxes Over Grandfathered Carbon Permits," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(3), pages 385-399.
    3. Ballard, Charles L., 1990. "Marginal welfare cost calculations : Differential analysis vs. balanced-budget analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 263-276, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Bento, Antonio M. & Jacobsen, Mark, 2007. "Ricardian rents, environmental policy and the `double-dividend' hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 17-31, January.
    6. van Asselt, Harro & Brewer, Thomas, 2010. "Addressing competitiveness and leakage concerns in climate policy: An analysis of border adjustment measures in the US and the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 42-51, January.
    7. Reyer Gerlagh & Onno Kuik, 2007. "Carbon Leakage with International Technology Spillovers," Working Papers 2007.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Waschik, Robert & Fraser, Iain, 2007. "A computable general equilibrium analysis of export taxes in the Australian wool industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 712-736, July.
    9. Roberton C. Williams III, 2002. "Environmental Tax Interactions When Pollution Affects Health or Productivity," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 13, pages 200-209, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Hiscox, Michael J., 2002. "Interindustry Factor Mobility And Technological Change: Evidence On Wage And Profit Dispersion Across U.S. Industries, 1820–1990," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(2), pages 383-416, June.
    11. Madhu Khanna & Carl H. Nelson, 2008. "Welfare Impacts of Alternative Public Policies for Agricultural Pollution Control in an Open Economy: A General Equilibrium Framework," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 701-718.
    12. Burniaux, Jean-Marc & Truong Truong, 2002. "GTAP-E: An Energy-Environmental Version of the GTAP Model," GTAP Technical Papers 923, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    13. Burniaux, Jean-March & Truong, Truong P., 2002. "Gtap-E: An Energy-Environmental Version Of The Gtap Model," Technical Papers 28705, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Grossman, Gene M & Levinsohn, James A, 1989. "Import Competition and the Stock Market Return to Capital," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1065-1087, December.
    15. Rutherford, Thomas F. & Rutstrom, E.E. & Tarr, David, 1993. "Morocco's free trade agreement with the European community : a quantitative assessment," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1173, The World Bank.
    16. Pearce, David W, 1991. "The Role of Carbon Taxes in Adjusting to Global Warming," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 938-948, July.
    17. Terence Huw Edwards & John Whalley, 2007. "Short‐ And Long‐Run Decompositions Of Uk Wage Inequality Changes," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Babiker, Mustafa H. & Metcalf, Gilbert E. & Reilly, John, 2003. "Tax distortions and global climate policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 269-287, September.
    19. Corrado Maria & Edwin Werf, 2008. "Carbon leakage revisited: unilateral climate policy with directed technical change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 55-74, February.
    20. Bovenberg, A. Lans & Goulder, Lawrence H. & Jacobsen, Mark R., 2008. "Costs of alternative environmental policy instruments in the presence of industry compensation requirements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1236-1253, June.
    21. Takeda, Shiro, 2007. "The double dividend from carbon regulations in Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 336-364, September.
    22. Iain Fraser & Robert Waschik, 2005. "Agricultural Land Retirement and Slippage: Lessons from an Australian Case Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    23. Barker, Terry & Junankar, Sudhir & Pollitt, Hector & Summerton, Philip, 2007. "Carbon leakage from unilateral Environmental Tax Reforms in Europe, 1995-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6281-6292, December.
    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. Iain Fraser & Robert Waschik, 2010. "The Double Dividend Hypothesis in a CGE Model: Specific Factors and Variable Labour Supply," Working Papers 2010.02, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
    2. Orlov, Anton & Grethe, Harald & McDonald, Scott, 2013. "Carbon taxation in Russia: Prospects for a double dividend and improved energy efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 128-140.
    3. J.M. Dixon & J. Nassios, 2018. "The Effectiveness of Investment Stimulus Policies in Australia," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-282, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    4. Gerlagh, Reyer & Kuik, Onno, 2014. "Spill or leak? Carbon leakage with international technology spillovers: A CGE analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 381-388.
    5. Michetti, Melania & Rosa, Renato, 2012. "Afforestation and timber management compliance strategies in climate policy. A computable general equilibrium analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 139-148.
    6. Concetta Castiglione & Davide Infante & Janna Smirnova, 2018. "Non-trivial Factors as Determinants of the Environmental Taxation Revenues in 27 EU Countries," Economies, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, January.
    7. Goulder, Lawrence H., 2013. "Climate change policy's interactions with the tax system," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 3-11.
    8. Anton Orlov & Harald Grethe, 2012. "Carbon Taxation in Russia: Relevance of Export Taxes on Energy Resources," EcoMod2012 4117, EcoMod.
    9. Jason Nassios & John Madden & James Giesecke & Janine Dixon & Nhi Tran & Peter Dixon & Maureen Rimmer & Philip Adams & John Freebairn, 2019. "The economic impact and efficiency of state and federal taxes in Australia," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-289, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    10. Freire-González, Jaume, 2018. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend hypothesis in CGE modelling literature: A critical review," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 194-223.
    11. Benjamin Jones & Michael Keen & Jon Strand, 2013. "Fiscal implications of climate change," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(1), pages 29-70, February.
    12. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    13. Takeda, Shiro, 2007. "The double dividend from carbon regulations in Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 336-364, September.
    14. Waschik, Robert & Fraser, Iain, 2007. "A computable general equilibrium analysis of export taxes in the Australian wool industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 712-736, July.
    15. Sato, Misato & Dechezleprêtre, Antoine, 2015. "Asymmetric industrial energy prices and international trade," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 130-141.
    16. Max Franks & Ottmar Edenhofer & Kai Lessmann, 2017. "Why Finance Ministers Favor Carbon Taxes, Even If They Do Not Take Climate Change into Account," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 445-472, November.
    17. Reyer Gerlagh & Onno Kuik, 2007. "Carbon Leakage with International Technology Spillovers," Working Papers 2007.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Ulf Johansen & Gerardo A. Perez-Valdes & Adrian Tobias Werner, 2018. "Regional Aspects of a Climate and Energy Tax Reform in Norway—Exploring Double and Multiple Dividends," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    19. Peterson, Everett B. & Schleich, Joachim & Duscha, Vicki, 2011. "Environmental and economic effects of the Copenhagen pledges and more ambitious emission reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3697-3708, June.
    20. Hertel, Thomas, 2013. "Global Applied General Equilibrium Analysis Using the Global Trade Analysis Project Framework," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 815-876, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models

    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:eneeco:v:39:y:2013:i:c:p:283-295. 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/eneco .

    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.