TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effective unilateral climate policy design
T2 - Size matters
AU - Böhringer, Christoph
AU - Fischer, Carolyn
AU - Rosendahl, Knut Einar
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Given the bleak prospects for a global agreement on mitigating climate change, pressure for unilateral abatement is increasing. A major challenge is emissions leakage. Border carbon adjustments and output-based allocation of emissions allowances can increase effectiveness of unilateral action but introduce distortions of their own. We assess antileakage measures as a function of abatement coalition size. We first develop a partial equilibrium analytical framework to see how these instruments affect emissions within and outside the coalition. We then employ a computable general equilibrium model of international trade and energy use to assess the strategies as the coalition grows. We find that full border adjustments rank first in global cost-effectiveness, followed by import tariffs and output-based rebates. The differences across measures and their overall appeal decline as the abatement coalition grows. In terms of cost, the coalition countries prefer border carbon adjustments; countries outside the coalition prefer output-based rebates.
AB - Given the bleak prospects for a global agreement on mitigating climate change, pressure for unilateral abatement is increasing. A major challenge is emissions leakage. Border carbon adjustments and output-based allocation of emissions allowances can increase effectiveness of unilateral action but introduce distortions of their own. We assess antileakage measures as a function of abatement coalition size. We first develop a partial equilibrium analytical framework to see how these instruments affect emissions within and outside the coalition. We then employ a computable general equilibrium model of international trade and energy use to assess the strategies as the coalition grows. We find that full border adjustments rank first in global cost-effectiveness, followed by import tariffs and output-based rebates. The differences across measures and their overall appeal decline as the abatement coalition grows. In terms of cost, the coalition countries prefer border carbon adjustments; countries outside the coalition prefer output-based rebates.
KW - Border carbon adjustments
KW - Emissions leakage
KW - Output-based rebates
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899964086&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899964086&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jeem.2013.12.008
DO - 10.1016/j.jeem.2013.12.008
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84899964086
SN - 0095-0696
VL - 67
SP - 318
EP - 339
JO - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
JF - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
IS - 3
ER -