Designing an Emissions Trading Scheme for China – An Up-to-Date Climate Policy Assessment

We assess recent Chinese climate policy proposals in a multi-region, multi-sector computable general equilibrium model with a Chinese carbon emissions trading scheme (ETS). When the emissions intensity per GDP in 2020 is required to be 45% lower than in 2005, the model simulations indicate that the climate policy induced welfare loss in 2020, measured as the level of GDP and welfare in 2020 under climate policy relative to their level under business-as-usual (BAU) in the same year, is about 1%. The Chinese welfare loss in 2020 slightly increases in the Chinese rate of economic growth in 2020. When keeping the emissions target fixed at the 2020 level after 2020 in absolute terms, the welfare loss will reach about 2% in 2030. If China׳s annual economic growth rate is 0.5 percentage points higher (lower), the climate policy-induced welfare loss in 2030 will rise (decline) by about 0.5 percentage points. Full auctioning of carbon allowances results in very similar macroeconomic effects as free allocation, but full auctioning leads to higher reductions in output than free allocation for ETS sectors. Linking the Chinese to the European ETS and restricting the transfer volume to one third of the EU׳s reduction effort creates at best a small benefit for China, yet with smaller sectoral output reductions than auctioning. These results highlight the importance of designing the Chinese ETS wisely.

[1]  Michael Hübler,et al.  Fair, optimal or detrimental? Environmental vs. strategic use of border carbon adjustment , 2012 .

[2]  Michael Jakob,et al.  Sectoral linking of carbon markets: A trade-theory analysis , 2012 .

[3]  Azusa Okagawa,et al.  Estimation of substitution elasticities for CGE models , 2008 .

[4]  Paul S. Armington.  A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production (Une théorie de la demande de produits différenciés d'après leur origine) (Una teoría de la demanda de productos distinguiéndolos según el lugar de producción) , 1969 .

[5]  Xin Wang,et al.  Is it in China's interest to implement an export carbon tax? , 2012 .

[6]  Can Wang,et al.  Analysis of the economic impact of different Chinese climate policy options based on a CGE model incorporating endogenous technological change , 2009 .

[7]  T. Rutherford,et al.  THE EU 20/20/2020 targets: An overview of the EMF22 assessment , 2009 .

[8]  Shinichiro Fujimori,et al.  The impacts of China’s household consumption expenditure patterns on energy demand and carbon emissions towards 2050 , 2012 .

[9]  Yongxia Cai,et al.  The role of China in mitigating climate change , 2012 .

[10]  Michael Hübler.  Carbon tariffs on Chinese exports: Emissions reduction, threat, or farce? , 2012 .

[11]  Gernot Klepper,et al.  Emissions Trading, CDM, JI, and More: The Climate Strategy of the EU , 2005 .

[12]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  Promoting Renewable Energy in Europe: A Hybrid Computable General Equilibrium Approach , 2006 .

[13]  Christoph Böhringer,et al.  Efficiency, Compensation, and Discrimination: What is at Stake When Implementing the EU Emissions Trading Scheme? , 2003 .

[14]  Péter Heindl,et al.  Supply and demand structure for international offset permits under the Copenhagen Pledges , 2012, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics.

[15]  W. Montgomery,et al.  Markets in Licenses and Efficient Pollution Control Programs" Journal of Economic Theory , 1972 .

[16]  Ottmar Edenhofer,et al.  Revisiting the case for intensity targets: Better incentives and less uncertainty for developing countries , 2010 .

[17]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  Climate Policy Beyond Kyoto: Quo Vadis? A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis Based on Expert Judgments , 2005 .

[18]  Shinichiro Fujimori,et al.  Assessment of China's climate commitment and non-fossil energy plan towards 2020 using hybrid AIM/CGE model , 2011 .

[19]  Valerie J. Karplus,et al.  Analyzing the Regional Impact of a Fossil Energy Cap in China , 2013 .

[20]  Michael Hübler,et al.  The EU Decarbonisation Roadmap 2050: What Way to Walk? , 2013 .

[21]  Tobias N. Rasmussen,et al.  Allocation of CO2 Emissions Permits: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Policy Instruments , 2000 .

[22]  Michael Hübler.  Technology diffusion under contraction and convergence: A CGE analysis of China , 2011 .

[23]  T. Rutherford,et al.  Combining bottom-up and top-down , 2008 .

[24]  Xiliang Zhang,et al.  The energy and CO2 emissions impact of renewable energy development in China , 2014 .

[25]  Bert Saveyn,et al.  Economic analysis of a low carbon path to 2050: A case for China, India and Japan , 2012 .

[26]  S. Dirkse,et al.  The path solver: a nommonotone stabilization scheme for mixed complementarity problems , 1995 .

[27]  Andreas Löschel,et al.  EU climate policy up to 2020: An economic impact assessment , 2009 .

[28]  Boqiang Lin,et al.  Estimates of energy subsidies in China and impact of energy subsidy reform , 2011 .

[29]  Jan Christoph Steckel,et al.  From carbonization to decarbonization?—Past trends and future scenarios for China's CO2 emissions , 2011 .

[30]  John Hutton,et al.  Allocation of carbon permits within a country: a general equilibrium analysis of the United Kingdom , 2001 .

[31]  L. Goulder,et al.  Environmental taxation and the double dividend: A reader's guide , 1995 .

[32]  Thomas F. Rutherford,et al.  Applied General Equilibrium Modeling with MPSGE as a GAMS Subsystem: An Overview of the Modeling Framework and Syntax , 1999 .

[33]  Ottmar Edenhofer,et al.  An Integrated Assessment Model with Endogenous Growth , 2012 .

[34]  David Kendrick,et al.  GAMS, a user's guide , 1988, SGNM.