English
 
Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

The fiscal benefits of stringent climate change mitigation: an overview

Authors

Siegmeier,  J.
External Organizations;

Mattauch,  L.
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/franks

Franks,  R. Maximilian
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

/persons/resource/klenert.david

Klenert,  David
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

/persons/resource/anselm.schultes

Schultes,  Anselm
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

/persons/resource/Ottmar.Edenhofer

Edenhofer,  Ottmar
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)

21938oa.pdf
(Postprint), 265KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Siegmeier, J., Mattauch, L., Franks, R. M., Klenert, D., Schultes, A., Edenhofer, O. (2018): The fiscal benefits of stringent climate change mitigation: an overview. - Climate Policy, 18, 3, 352-367.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1400943


Cite as: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_21938
Abstract
The Paris Agreement’s very ambitious mitigation goals, notably to ‘pursue efforts’ to limit warming to 1.5°C, imply that climate policy will remain a national affair for some time. One key obstacle to very ambitious national mitigation is that some policy makers perceive this to be in competition with major goals of fiscal policy, such as public investment or debt reduction. However, climate policy may actually contribute to these other objectives. Importantly, many fiscal implications of substantial carbon prices, which are essential for stringent mitigation targets such as the 1.5°C goal, have long been neglected by economic analyses of climate change mitigation. We systematically review recent contributions on interactions between climate policy and public finance, which include many topics beyond the classic `double dividend’ of environmental tax swaps. We can thus identify new conclusions about climate policy designs that may overcome fiscal objections and research gaps. We find that national climate policy often aligns with other objectives, provided that climate policies and fiscal policies are integrated well. A first class of interactions concerns public revenue-raising: carbon pricing can replace distortionary taxes and alleviate international tax competition; climate policy also changes asset values, which impacts the base of non-climate taxes and boosts productive investment. Second, they concern public spending, which needs to be restructured as a part of climate policy, while carbon pricing revenues may be recycled for public investment. Third, distributional impacts of climate policies include changes to household expenditures, to asset values and to employment; balancing them often requires fiscal policies. Our findings underline that jointly considering climate policy and fiscal policy can help to make substantial mitigation politically feasible.