IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-08-10-efd.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

“Co-benefits” of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies in China: An Integrated Top-Down and Bottom-Up Modeling Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Cao, Jing
  • Ho, Mun
  • Jorgenson, Dale

Abstract

Many greenhouse gas mitigation policies that shift fossil fuel use are accompanied by some hidden environmental benefits, so called “co-benefits” or “ancillary benefits.” Since these “co-benefits” are often overlooked by government policy makers, there tends to be a bias in the policy analysis of various environmental policies and government strategies on global warming. To achieve a plausible estimate of the magnitude of these co-benefits of potential carbon reduction policies in China, this paper applied an integrated modeling approach by combining a top-down recursive dynamic CGE (computable general equilibrium) model with a bottom-up electricity sector model, to simulate three macro-level environmental tax policies: output tax, fuel tax, and carbon tax, as well as national-sectoral mixed policies (a national tax policy with emission caps in the electricity sector). Based on the integrated model simulations, the estimated ancillary health benefits from the three taxes are quite significant. Under the revenue neutrality condition, it is very likely that China would obtain a “win-win” solution with respect to carbon mitigation, especially if these co-benefits are included in the policy-making cost-benefit analysis. The integrated modeling approach also provides a useful way to examine a complicated mixed policy, such as a national tax policy combined with sectoral-level emission cap policies. In order to achieve both objectives regarding local co-benefits and induce technology change, this model suggests that the preferred policy for China is either a national level fuel tax or carbon tax imposed at the national level with carbon emission caps in the electricity sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Cao, Jing & Ho, Mun & Jorgenson, Dale, 2008. "“Co-benefits” of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies in China: An Integrated Top-Down and Bottom-Up Modeling Analysis," Discussion Papers dp-08-10-efd, Resources For the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-08-10-efd
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/EfD-DP-08-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palmer, Karen & Burtraw, Dallas, 1997. "Electricity restructuring and regional air pollution," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 139-174, March.
    2. Burtraw, Dallas & Krupnick, Alan & Palmer, Karen & Paul, Anthony & Toman, Michael & Bloyd, Cary, 2003. "Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 650-673, May.
    3. Boyd Roy & Krutilla Kerry & Viscusi W. Kip, 1995. "Energy Taxation as a Policy Instrument to Reduce CO2 Emissions: A Net Benefit Analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Klinge Jacobsen, Henrik, 1998. "Integrating the bottom-up and top-down approach to energy-economy modelling: the case of Denmark," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 443-461, September.
    5. Gielen, Dolf & Changhong, Chen, 2001. "The CO2 emission reduction benefits of Chinese energy policies and environmental policies:: A case study for Shanghai, period 1995-2020," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 257-270, November.
    6. McFarland, J. R. & Reilly, J. M. & Herzog, H. J., 2004. "Representing energy technologies in top-down economic models using bottom-up information," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 685-707, July.
    7. Wilson, Deborah & Swisher, Joel, 1993. "Exploring the gap : Top-down versus bottom-up analyses of the cost of mitigating global warming," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 249-263, March.
    8. Sébastien Dessus & David O'Connor, 2003. "Climate Policy without Tears CGE-Based Ancillary Benefits Estimates for Chile," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 287-317, July.
    9. Koopmans, Carl C. & te Velde, Dirk Willem, 2001. "Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy demand model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 57-75, January.
    10. David O’Connor & Fan Zhai & Kristin Aunan & Terje Berntsen & Haakon Vennemo, 2003. "Agricultural and Human Health Impacts of Climate Policy in China: A General Equilibrium Analysis with Special Reference to Guangdong," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 206, OECD Publishing.
    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. repec:gii:giihei:ciesrp:cies_rp_26 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Muller, Nicholas Z., 2012. "The design of optimal climate policy with air pollution co-benefits," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 696-722.
    3. Chiara Ravetti & Timothy Swanson & Mu Quan & Xuxuan Xie & Zhang Shiqiu, 2014. "Ancillary Benefits of GHG Abatement Policies in Developing Countries: A literature Survey," CIES Research Paper series 26-2014, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Co-benefits; climate change; CGE model; bottom-up model; top-down model;

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-08-10-efd. 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: (Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.html .

    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 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.

    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.