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 (beschränkter Zugriff)
Für Ihren IP-Bereich sind aktuell keine Volltexte freigegeben.
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte in PuRe verfügbar
Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Zhao, J., Mattauch, L. (in press): When standards have better distributional consequences than carbon taxes. - Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.


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.