|
on Resource Economics |
|
Issue of 2017‒07‒09
three papers chosen by |
| By: | George Marbuah (Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences); Franklin Amuakwa-Mensah (Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences) |
| Abstract: | This paper contributes to an emerging literature on the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) relationship between pollution and income at the local level by analyzing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) and total suspended particulate (TSP). We conduct several spatial statistical and econometric tests to account for spatial dependence between 290 Swedish municipalities on the selected emissions. Results highlight evidence that the pollution and income relationship is significantly characterized by spatial interaction effects. That is, municipality per capita emissions are strongly influenced by emissions trajectories in neighbouring municipalities. Implications of our findings on policy are discussed. |
| Keywords: | Environmental Kuznets curve, Spatial econometric analysis, Emissions, Sweden, |
| JEL: | Q53 Q55 R12 |
| Date: | 2017–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fae:wpaper:2017.12&r=res |
| By: | Johanna Arlinghaus (OECD); Kurt van Dender (OECD) |
| Abstract: | In a bold policy effort, Mexico recently moved away from subsidies to transport fuels, increased tax rates on these fuels and introduced a carbon tax. This paper analyses these reforms using a broad set of criteria that consider the main practical dimensions of environmental policy design: environmental effectiveness, equity and distributional impacts, broader tax system impacts, macroeconomic effects, compliance and administration, policy process and consistency. The reforms significantly improve the extent to which the external costs of energy use are reflected in prices and increase government revenues, but, as price deregulation progresses further, more attention may need to be devoted to analysing and addressing the policies’ distributive effects. The analysis also highlights that ease of administration and collection are an important and desirable property of carbon taxes, especially in emerging market contexts. |
| Keywords: | carbon pricing, distributional effects, energy taxation, fossil-fuel subsidies, tax reform |
| JEL: | H23 Q48 Q52 |
| Date: | 2017–07–05 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ctpaaa:31-en&r=res |
| By: | Kristie Ebi (Department of Global Health, University of Washington); Michael Keller; Richard S.J. Tol (Department of Economics, University of Sussex; Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam; CESifo, Munich); Gary Yohe (Department of Economics, Wesleyan University) |
| Abstract: | Secondary benefits (or costs), otherwise known in the literature as co-benefits or ancillary benefits, are the added net benefits that can be attributed to policies that are above and beyond the primary benefits of climate policies. For example, the primary benefit of greenhouse gas emission reduction is to reduce the magnitude of future climate change; the secondary benefits are expressed in terms of changes in the patterns and concentrations of other pollutants and their secondary compounds. The paper follows a brief review of studies that attempted to quantify health co-benefits with a discussion of the basic underlying economic structure built on first principles of economic thought. It not only portrays the complexity that erupts when there are multiple and interdependent positive or negative externalities across different sources, but also examines several, sometimes surprising conjectures that apply more widely to secondary benefit considerations of all stripes. Concludes remarks synthesize these conjectures for health contexts, for more general policy evaluations beyond the health sphere, and for aggregate constructions such as the social cost of carbon. |
| Keywords: | climate policy; secondary benefits |
| JEL: | Q54 |
| Date: | 2017–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sus:susewp:1117&r=res |