IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v36y2008i4p1538-1544.html

Promoting biofuels: Implications for developing countries

Author

Listed:
  • Peters, Jörg
  • Thielmann, Sascha

Abstract

Interest in biofuels is growing worldwide as concerns about the security of energy supply and climate change are moving into the focus of policy makers. With the exception of bioethanol from Brazil, however, production costs of biofuels are typically much higher than those of fossil fuels. As a result, promotion measures such as tax exemptions or blending quotas are indispensable for ascertaining substantial biofuel demand. With particular focus on developing countries, this paper discusses the economic justification of biofuel promotion instruments and investigates their implications. Based on data from India and Tanzania, we find that substantial biofuel usage induces significant financial costs. Furthermore, acreage availability is a binding natural limitation that could also lead to conflicts with food production. Yet, if carefully implemented under the appropriate conditions, biofuel programs might present opportunities for certain developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Peters, Jörg & Thielmann, Sascha, 2008. "Promoting biofuels: Implications for developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1538-1544, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:4:p:1538-1544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(08)00018-9
    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 below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frondel, Manuel & Peters, Jorg, 2007. "Biodiesel: A new Oildorado?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1675-1684, March.
    2. Newbery, D., 2005. "Why Tax Energy? Towards a More Rational Energy Policy," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0508, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    3. Ian W. H. Parry & Kenneth A. Small, 2005. "Does Britain or the United States Have the Right Gasoline Tax?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1276-1289, September.
    4. Dannenberg, Astrid & Mennel, Tim & Moslener, Ulf, 2008. "What does Europe pay for clean energy?--Review of macroeconomic simulation studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1318-1330, April.
    5. Daemon Fairless, 2007. "Biofuel: The little shrub that could - maybe," Nature, Nature, vol. 449(7163), pages 652-655, October.
    6. Ryan, Lisa & Convery, Frank & Ferreira, Susana, 2006. "Stimulating the use of biofuels in the European Union: Implications for climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3184-3194, November.
    7. Harold Hotelling, 1931. "The Economics of Exhaustible Resources," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(2), pages 137-137.
    8. Bergstrom, Theodore C, 1982. "On Capturing Oil Rents with a National Excise Tax," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 194-201, March.
    9. McDonald, Scott & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2006. "Impact of switching production to bioenergy crops: The switchgrass example," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 243-265, March.
    10. repec:aen:journl:2005v26-03-a01 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2007. "Federal Tax Policy Towards Energy," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 21, pages 145-184, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. 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.
    3. Strand, Jon, 2010. "Taxes and caps as climate policy instruments with domestic and imported fuels," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5171, The World Bank.
    4. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:17:y:2008:i:13:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Renaud Coulomb & Fanny Henriet, 2014. "The Grey Paradox: How Oil Owners Can Benefit From Carbon Regulation," Working Papers hal-00818350, HAL.
    6. Jon Strand, 2010. "Taxes versus Cap-and-Trade in Climate Policy when only some Fuel Importers Abate," CESifo Working Paper Series 3233, CESifo.
    7. Roger Fouquet, 2012. "Economics of Energy and Climate Change: Origins, Developments and Growth," Working Papers 2012-08, BC3.
    8. Legge, Thomas & Scott, Susan, 2009. "Policy Options to Reduce Ireland's Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS9.
    9. Daubanes, Julien, 2009. "Taxation of Oil Products and GDP Dynamics of Oil-Rich Countries," TSE Working Papers 09-012, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    10. Julien Daubanes, 2008. "Fossil fuels supplied by oligopolies: On optimal taxation and rent capture," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(13), pages 1-11.
    11. Daubanes, Julien, 2011. "Optimal taxation of a monopolistic extractor: Are subsidies necessary?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 399-403, May.
    12. Navajas, Fernando H. & Panadeiros, Monica & Natale, Oscar, 2011. "Environmentally Related Energy Taxes in Argentina, Bolivia and Uruguay," MPRA Paper 37829, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Corinne Chaton & Anna Creti & Bertrand Villeneuve, 2005. "The Economics of Seasonal Gas Storage," Working Papers 2005-52, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    14. Moschini, GianCarlo & Cui, Jingbo & Lapan, Harvey E., . "Economics of Biofuels: An Overview of Policies, Impacts and Prospects," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-28.
    15. Coulomb, Renaud & Henriet, Fanny, 2018. "The Grey Paradox: How fossil-fuel owners can benefit from carbon taxation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 206-223.
    16. Johannes Pfeiffer, 2017. "Fossil Resources and Climate Change – The Green Paradox and Resource Market Power Revisited in General Equilibrium," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 77, April.
    17. repec:esr:resser:rs009 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Vollebergh, Herman R.J., 2008. "Lessons from the polder: Energy tax design in The Netherlands from a climate change perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 660-672, January.
    19. Ngo Long, 2011. "Dynamic Games in the Economics of Natural Resources: A Survey," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 115-148, March.
    20. Strand, Jon, 2010. "Optimal fossil-fuel taxation with backstop technologies and tenure risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 418-422, March.
    21. Neuwahl, Frederik & Löschel, Andreas & Mongelli, Ignazio & Delgado, Luis, 2008. "Employment impacts of EU biofuels policy: Combining bottom-up technology information and sectoral market simulations in an input-output framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 447-460, December.
    22. Legge, Thomas & Scott, Susan, 2009. "Policy Options to Reduce Ireland's GHG Emissions [Instrument choice: the pros and cons of alternative policy instruments]," Papers WP284, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    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:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:4:p:1538-1544. 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.