Deutsch
 
Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

When standards have better distributional consequences than carbon taxes

Urheber*innen

Zhao,  Jiaxin
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/Linus.Mattauch

Mattauch,  Linus
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine externen Ressourcen hinterlegt
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

27431oa.pdf
(Postprint), 3MB

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Zhao, J., Mattauch, L. (2022): When standards have better distributional consequences than carbon taxes. - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 116, 102747.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102747


Zitierlink: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_27431
Zusammenfassung
Carbon pricing is the efficient instrument to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Nevertheless, the geographical and sectoral coverage of substantial carbon pricing remains low, often due to concerns about increasing economic inequality. Regula- tions such as fuel economy standards are more popular. Could the reason be that they have an equity advantage over carbon pricing? We develop two models, one representing energy services and the other the carbon-intensity of consumption, to identify the economic situations in which this is the case. First, we prove that an ef- ficiency standard can be more equitable than carbon pricing when consumers prefer high-carbon technology attributes. Evidence from the US vehicle market confirms this finding. Second, we show theoretically, and through a numerical application to the Chinese transport sector, that intensity standards are preferable when richer households consume a greater share of high-emissions goods. Our results hold when the redistribution of carbon pricing revenue is not progressive. These insights may help advance decarbonisation when pricing instruments remain unpopular.