IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v51y2024i2p354-398..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing climate pledges and eco-taxation in a networked agricultural supply chain organisation

Author

Listed:
  • Arnaud Z Dragicevic
  • Jean-Christophe Pereau

Abstract

This paper examines the effectiveness of climate pledges and eco-taxation as strategies for mitigating climate change within a networked agricultural supply chain organisation. We utilise variational inequality techniques within a multicriteria decision-making framework and validate our theoretical findings through numerical simulations using a machine learning augmented algorithm. By employing this approach, we position the Agricultural Sector Roadmap, aimed at capping global warming at 1.5°C, within the wider agricultural sector’s climate action framework. Our results demonstrate that environmental taxation emerges as the most effective approach for addressing climate change. Eco-taxation leads to a 57.87 per cent reduction in global emissions, whereas climate pledges only account for a 20.59 per cent reduction at the same level of production. Furthermore, eco-taxation results in a 45.68 per cent greater reduction in emission intensity compared to climate pledges. In contrast to climate commitments, an eco-fiscal policy is capable of achieving the objectives established by the European Union.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnaud Z Dragicevic & Jean-Christophe Pereau, 2024. "Comparing climate pledges and eco-taxation in a networked agricultural supply chain organisation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 51(2), pages 354-398.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:51:y:2024:i:2:p:354-398.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbae001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:erevae:v:51:y:2024:i:2:p:354-398.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.