IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v60y2013icp764-774.html

Economic impact assessment of Turkey's post-Kyoto vision on emission trading

Author

Listed:
  • Akın Olçum, Gökçe
  • Yeldan, Erinç

Abstract

For the post-Kyoto period, Turkey strongly emphasizes the establishment of national emission trading system by 2015 and its integration with the EU ETS along its accession process to the EU. In this paper, we study the mechanisms of adjustment and economic welfare consequences of various ETS regimes that Turkey considers to apply by 2020, i.e. regional ETS and international trading within the EU ETS. We conduct our analysis under the current EU 20–20–20 emission target, 20%, and also under its revised version, 30%. We find that Turkey has economic gains from linking with the EU ETS under the 20% cap, in comparison to the domestic ETSs. Despite the EU's welfare loss under linkage in comparison to the case where Turkey has domestic abatement efforts, it still prefers linking as it increases economic well being compared to the case where Turkey does not abate. Under 30% cutback, Turkey has critical output loss under linkage due to high abatement burden on the EU, while the EU is better off as it passes some of its abatement burden to Turkey. Therefore, emission quotas and their allocation across the ETS and non ETS sectors become highly critical in distributing the overall economic gains from bilateral trading.

Suggested Citation

  • Akın Olçum, Gökçe & Yeldan, Erinç, 2013. "Economic impact assessment of Turkey's post-Kyoto vision on emission trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 764-774.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:60:y:2013:i:c:p:764-774
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513003509
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.018?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. 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.
    2. Anger, Niels, 2008. "Emissions trading beyond Europe: Linking schemes in a post-Kyoto world," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2028-2049, July.
    3. Hiro Lee & Joaquim Oliveira Martins & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 1994. "The OECD Green Model: An Updated Overview," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 97, OECD Publishing.
    4. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    5. N. Anger & B. Brouns & J. Onigkeit, 2009. "Linking the EU emissions trading scheme: economic implications of allowance allocation and global carbon constraints," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 379-398, June.
    6. Christoph Böhringer & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2010. "The Costs of Compliance: A CGE Assessment of Canada’s Policy Options under the Kyoto Protocol," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 177-211, February.
    7. 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.
    8. repec:aen:journl:2004v25-02-a02 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. AydIn, Levent & Acar, Mustafa, 2010. "Economic and environmental implications of Turkish accession to the European Union: A CGE analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7031-7040, November.
    10. Eyckmans, Johan & Hagem, Cathrine, 2011. "The European Union's potential for strategic emissions trading through permit sales contracts," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 247-267, January.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Acar, Sevil & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2015. "Environmental Impacts of Coal Subsidies in Turkey: A Regional General Equilibrium Analysis," Conference papers 332641, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Kolsuz, Gunes & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2017. "Economics of climate change and green employment: A general equilibrium investigation for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1240-1250.
    3. Kat, Bora & Paltsev, Sergey & Yuan, Mei, 2018. "Turkish energy sector development and the Paris Agreement goals: A CGE model assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 84-96.
    4. Chang, Kai & Zhang, Chao & Chang, Hao, 2016. "Emissions reduction allocation and economic welfare estimation through interregional emissions trading in China: Evidence from efficiency and equity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1125-1135.
    5. Acar, Sevil & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2016. "Environmental impacts of coal subsidies in Turkey: A general equilibrium analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1-15.

    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. Mario A. Fernandez & Adam J. Daigneault, 2018. "Money Does Grow On Trees: Impacts Of The Paris Agreement On The New Zealand Economy," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-23, August.
    2. Arvaniti, Maria & Habla, Wolfgang, 2021. "The political economy of negotiating international carbon markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Bin Wu & Wanying Huang & Pengfei Liu, 2017. "Carbon Reduction Strategies Based on an NW Small-World Network with a Progressive Carbon Tax," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Marschinski, Robert & Flachsland, Christian & Jakob, Michael, 2012. "Sectoral linking of carbon markets: A trade-theory analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 585-606.
    5. Kolsuz, Gunes & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 2017. "Economics of climate change and green employment: A general equilibrium investigation for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1240-1250.
    6. Hintermann, Beat & Peterson, Sonja & Rickels, Wilfried, 2014. "Price and market behavior in Phase II of the EU ETS," Kiel Working Papers 1962, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    7. Aziz Bouzaher & Sebnem Sahin & Erinç Yeldan, 2015. "HOW TO GO GREEN: a general equilibrium investigation of environmental policies for sustained growth with an application to Turkey’s economy," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 49-76, March.
    8. Itkonen, Juha, 2017. "Efficiency and dependency in a network of linked permit markets," Research Discussion Papers 20/2017, Bank of Finland.
    9. K. Ali Akkemik & Shinya Kato, 2023. "Estimating the economic and climate impacts of nuclear power in Turkey: hypothetical integration and dynamic CGE analysis," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 489-532, August.
    10. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Veith, Stefan & Werner, Jörg R. & Zimmermann, Jochen, 2009. "Capital market response to emission rights returns: Evidence from the European power sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 605-613, July.
    13. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    14. Chao-Ning Liao, 2009. "Technology adoption decisions under a mixed regulatory system of tradable permits and air pollution fees for the control of Total Suspended Particulates in Taiwan," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 135-153, April.
    15. Berta, Nathalie, 2015. "Prix versus quantités : les contorsions du marché du carbone européen," Revue de la Régulation - Capitalisme, institutions, pouvoirs, Association Recherche et Régulation, vol. 18.
    16. Chung, Sung H. & Weaver, Robert D. & Friesz, Terry L., 2013. "Strategic response to pollution taxes in supply chain networks: Dynamic, spatial, and organizational dimensions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 314-327.
    17. Böhringer, Christoph & Fischer, Carolyn & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2014. "Cost-effective unilateral climate policy design: Size matters," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 318-339.
    18. Liu, Beibei & He, Pan & Zhang, Bing & Bi, Jun, 2012. "Impacts of alternative allowance allocation methods under a cap-and-trade program in power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 405-415.
    19. Anger, Niels & Oberndorfer, Ulrich, 2008. "Firm performance and employment in the EU emissions trading scheme: An empirical assessment for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 12-22, January.
    20. Weber, Marian L., 2001. "Markets for Water Rights under Environmental Constraints," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 53-64, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:60:y:2013:i:c:p:764-774. 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.