IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/wz8tc_v1.html

Measuring emission intensity of jobs identifies distinct sector challenges for climate policy

Author

Listed:
  • Hansen, Oskar Wood
  • Koslowski, Maximilian

Abstract

Paris pledges have yet to translate into effective climate policy as global warming approaches 1.5°C. A major political obstacle to the green transition is the “job-killing” argument, which persists due to public concerns about job losses and the inevitable decline of some sectors. To examine how this challenge varies across sectors, we analyse the emission intensity of employment (CO2eq/job), complementing the traditional indicator – emissions per value added. Using final goods-based accounting, we estimate the domestic emissions and employment in each sector as well as in their supply chains. This reveals the need for policies that balance emission reductions with job losses not just in targeted sectors but throughout the economy. Our results show sectors vary widely in job generation and emission intensity of jobs, implying distinct policy challenges. In response, we propose a sector-specific policy framework with four strategies: Protect & proceed; Keep & decarbonise; Decarbonise or decline; and Let live. These strategies combine three kinds of climate policy to match sector characteristics: carbon pricing, green industrial policy, and just transition measures. By addressing decarbonisation and employment in a balanced way, these strategies can improve public acceptability and enhance the political feasibility of climate action.

Suggested Citation

  • Hansen, Oskar Wood & Koslowski, Maximilian, 2025. "Measuring emission intensity of jobs identifies distinct sector challenges for climate policy," OSF Preprints wz8tc_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:wz8tc_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/wz8tc_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/67f79230d13957a9dbcf6b59/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/wz8tc_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan Oosterhaven & Maaike C. Bouwmeester, 2016. "A New Approach To Modeling The Impact Of Disruptive Events," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 583-595, September.
    2. Stefan Drews & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2016. "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 855-876, October.
    3. Robert E. O'Connor & Richard J. Bord & Brent Yarnal & Nancy Wiefek, 2002. "Who Wants to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Guillermo MONTT & Kirsten S. WIEBE & Marek HARSDORFF & Moana SIMAS & Antoine BONNET & Richard WOOD, 2018. "Does climate action destroy jobs? An assessment of the employment implications of the 2‐degree goal," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 157(4), pages 519-556, December.
    5. Philippe Thalmann, 2004. "The Public Acceptance of Green Taxes: 2 Million Voters Express Their Opinion," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 119(1_2), pages 179-217, April.
    6. Fergus Green & Ajay Gambhir, 2020. "Transitional assistance policies for just, equitable and smooth low-carbon transitions: who, what and how?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 902-921, September.
    7. Ronald E. Miller, 1966. "Interregional Feedback Effects In Input‐Output Models: Some Preliminary Results," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 105-125, January.
    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. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    2. Sterner, Thomas & Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Erik, 2024. "Economists and the climate," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. Odland, Severin & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Corbett, Meghan & Pardy, Aaron, 2023. "What policies do homeowners prefer for building decarbonization and why? An exploration of climate policy support in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Sælen, Håkon Grøn & Aasen, Marianne, 2023. "Exploring public opposition and support across different climate policies: Poles apart?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    6. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    7. Doganoglu, Toker & Grzybowski, Lukasz & Rachubik, Joanna, 2026. "Determinants of willingness to bear the costs for environmental protection: Insights from cross-country survey data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    8. Fanghella, Valeria & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Schleich, Joachim, 2023. "What's in it for me? Self-interest and preferences for distribution of costs and benefits of energy efficiency policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    9. Groh, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2018. "On self-interested preferences for burden sharing rules: An econometric analysis for the costs of energy policy measures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 417-426.
    10. Elke D. Groh & Andreas Ziegler, 2017. "On self-interested preferences for burden sharing rules: An econometric analysis for the costs of energy policy measures," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201754, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    11. Peter Dirksmeier & Leonie Tuitjer, 2023. "Do trust and renewable energy use enhance perceived climate change efficacy in Europe?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8753-8776, August.
    12. Ziegler, Andreas, 2019. "The Relevance of Attitudinal Factors for the Acceptance of Energy Policy Measures: A Micro-econometric Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 129-140.
    13. Emma Ejelöv & Andreas Nilsson, 2020. "Individual Factors Influencing Acceptability for Environmental Policies: A Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, March.
    14. D’Ecclesiis, Enrico A.R. & Levi, Eugenio & Patriarca, Fabrizio, 2025. "Exploring the multifaceted relationship between environmental attitudes and political voting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    15. Junghwa Choi & Wesley Wehde & Romit Maulik, 2024. "Politics of problem definition: Comparing public support of climate change mitigation policies using machine learning," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 41(1), pages 104-134, January.
    16. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.
    17. Laurent Ott & Mehdi Farsi & Sylvain Weber, 2021. "Beyond political divides: analyzing public opinion on carbon taxation in Switzerland," Chapters, in: Axel Franzen & Sebastian Mader (ed.), Research Handbook on Environmental Sociology, chapter 17, pages 313-339, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Wiktoria Wilkowska & Mona Frank & Johanna Kluge & Martina Ziefle, 2024. "How Do We Move towards a Greener and Socially Equitable Future? Identifying the Trade-Offs of Accepted CO 2 Pricing Revenues in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-29, April.
    19. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    20. Matteo Migheli, 2021. "Green purchasing: the effect of parenthood and gender," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10576-10600, July.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:wz8tc_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.