|
|
Simulation analysis and comparative study on the effects of China's carbon reduction policy-On how to balance the dual goals of economic growth and carbon intensity reduction |
ZHANG Tong-bin, LIU Lin |
School of Economics, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, Dalian 116025, China |
|
|
Abstract By specifying a dynamic general equilibrium model including energy consumption, carbon emission and carbon emission reduction policies, a simulation analysis of both emission reduction effects and economic effects of carbon cap policy and carbon intensity policy was performed. The results showed that different carbon reduction policies effectively controlled carbon emission and achieved the goal of reducing carbon intensity. However, due to different policy strengths and different paths taken in the policy, carbon cap reduction policy had a strong inhibitory effect on economic growth while the negative impact of carbon intensity reduction policy on economic growth was relatively weak. Furthermore, based on the perspectives of social welfare and emission reduction cost, a cost-benefit analysis of the different carbon emission reduction policies was done. The findings were that compared with the carbon intensity policy, the carbon cap policy had comparative strengths in enhancing social welfare and lowering emission reduction cost. Thus, the transition from carbon intensity policy to carbon cap policy was the key to welfare enhancement, environmental improvement and other dividends.
|
Received: 04 March 2017
|
|
|
|
|
[1] |
王文军,傅崇辉,骆跃军,等.我国碳排放权交易机制试点地区的ETS管理效率评价[J]. 中国环境科学, 2014,34(6):1614-1621.
|
[2] |
张友国,郑玉歆.碳强度约束的宏观效应和结构效应[J]. 中国工业经济, 2014,(6):57-69.
|
[3] |
Wang K, Wang C, Chen J N. Analysis of the economic impact of different Chinese climate policy options based on a CGE model incorporating endogenous technological change[J]. Energy Policy, 2009,37(8):2930-2940.
|
[4] |
杨翱,刘纪显,吴兴弈.基于DSGE模型的碳减排目标和碳排放政策效应研究[J]. 资源科学, 2014,36(7):1452-1461.
|
[5] |
范庆泉,周县华,刘净然.碳强度的双重红利:环境质量改善与经济持续增长[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015,25(6):62-71.
|
[6] |
Tang L, Wu J, Yu L, et al. Carbon emissions trading scheme exploration in China:A multi-agent-based model[J]. Energy Policy, 2015,81:152-169.
|
[7] |
任松彦,戴瀚程,汪鹏,等.碳交易政策的经济影响:以广东省为例[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2015,11(1):61-67.
|
[8] |
Cheng B, Dai H, Wang P, Zhao D, Masui T. Impacts of carbon trading scheme on air pollutant emissions in Guangdong Province of China[J]. Energy for Sustainable Development, 2015,27:174-185.
|
[9] |
李薇,董艳艳,卢晗,等."十三五"规划碳减排目标下碳交易机制的博弈分析[J]. 中国环境科学, 2016,36(9):2857-2864.
|
[10] |
Fischer C. Combining rate-based and cap-and-trade emissions policies[J]. Climate Policy, 2003,3(S2):S89-S103.
|
[11] |
Fischer C, Springborn M. Emission targets and the real business cycle:Intensity targets versus caps or taxes[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 2011,62(3):352-366.
|
[12] |
张友国.碳强度与总量约束的绩效比较:基于CGE模型的分析[J]. 世界经济, 2013,(7):138-160.
|
[13] |
Minihan E S, Wu Z. Economic structure and strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation[J]. Energy Economics, 2012,34(1):350-357.
|
[14] |
Heutel G. How should environmental policy respond to business cycles? Optimal policy under persistent productivity shocks[J]. Review of Economic Dynamics, 2012,15(2):244-264.
|
[15] |
Barrage L. Optimal dynamic carbon taxes in a climate-economy model with distortionary fiscal policy[C]//New Haven:The Cowles Conference on Macroeconomics and Climate Change, 2012.
|
[16] |
Dudek D, Golub A. Intensity targets:pathway or roadblock to preventing climate change while enhancing economic growth?[J]. Climate Policy, 2003,3(S2):S21-S28.
|
[17] |
王金南,蔡博峰,严刚,等.排放强度承诺下的CO2排放总量控制研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 2010,30(11):1568-1572.
|
[18] |
田中华,杨泽亮,蔡睿贤.广东省能源消费碳排放分析及碳排放强度影响因素研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 2015,35(6):1885-1891.
|
[19] |
范丹.中国能源消费碳排放变化的驱动因素研究——基于LMDI-PDA分解法[J]. 中国环境科学, 2013,33(9):1705-1713.
|
|
|
|