IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Climate Policy Beyond Kyoto: Quo Vadis?


  • Andreas Loschel
  • Christoph Bohringer


We investigate the possible future of Post-Kyoto climate policies until 2020. Based on a cross-impact analysis, we first evaluate an expert poll to identify the most likely Post-Kyoto climate policy scenarios. We then use a computable general equilibrium model to assess the economic implications of these scenarios. We find that Post-Kyoto agreements will include only small reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions, with abatement duties predominantly assigned to the industrialized countries, while developing countries remain uncommitted, but can sell emission abatement to the industrialized world. Equity rules to allocate abatement duties are mainly based on sovereignty or ability-to-pay. Global adjustment costs to Post-Kyoto policies are very moderate, but regional costs to fuel exporting countries can be substantial because of distinct terms-of-trade effects on fossil fuel markets. Copyright 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd..
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Loschel & Christoph Bohringer, 2004. "Climate Policy Beyond Kyoto: Quo Vadis?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2004 13, Royal Economic Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecj:ac2004:13

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Slade, Margaret E, 1998. "Beer and the Tie: Did Divestiture of Brewer-Owned Public Houses Lead to Higher Beer Prices?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 565-602, May.
    2. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    3. Riordan, Michael H, 1998. "Anticompetitive Vertical Integration by a Dominant Firm," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1232-1248, December.
    4. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-366, May.
    5. Ordover, Janusz A & Saloner, Garth & Salop, Steven C, 1990. "Equilibrium Vertical Foreclosure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 127-142, March.
    6. Bühler, Stefan & Schmutzler, Armin, 2003. "Who Integrates?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4066, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Michael A. Salinger, 1988. "Vertical Mergers and Market Foreclosure," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 345-356.
    8. Banerjee, Samiran & Lin, Ping, 2003. "Downstream R&D, raising rivals' costs, and input price contracts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 79-96, January.
    9. Laurent Linnemer, 2003. "Backward Integration by a Dominant Firm," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 231-259, June.
    10. Bengt Holmstrom & John Roberts, 1998. "The Boundaries of the Firm Revisited," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 73-94, Fall.
    11. Colangelo, Giuseppe, 1995. "Vertical vs. Horizontal Integration: Pre-emptive Merging," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 323-337, September.
    12. Slade, Margaret E, 1998. "Strategic Motives for Vertical Separation: Evidence from Retail Gasoline Markets," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 84-113, April.
    13. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    2. Andries Hof & Michel Elzen & Detlef Vuuren, 2009. "Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes: what can we learn from model studies?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 39-62, February.
    3. Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang, 2008. "Cross-impact balances," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 387(14), pages 3689-3700.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ecj:ac2004:13. 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: (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.