Welfare and inequality impacts of carbon pricing and compensation schemes on fuel poor households in Styria, Austria

IF 5.8 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS
Veronika Kulmer , Dominik Kortschak , Judith Köberl , Sebastian Seebauer
{"title":"Welfare and inequality impacts of carbon pricing and compensation schemes on fuel poor households in Styria, Austria","authors":"Veronika Kulmer ,&nbsp;Dominik Kortschak ,&nbsp;Judith Köberl ,&nbsp;Sebastian Seebauer","doi":"10.1016/j.egycc.2025.100177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Carbon pricing is a core pillar in the policy mix required for the transition to carbon neutrality. Carbon pricing raises energy prices and related service costs, but distributes the burden unequally among the population, which though can be mitigated by accompanying compensation schemes. For the example of the Austrian Province of Styria, we analyze the impacts of national carbon pricing for heating and motor fuels. Using the Exact Affine Stone Index (EASI) demand system and applying different definitions of fuel poverty, we compare how five compensation schemes mitigate impacts on fuel poor households. Uncompensated carbon pricing has nearly twice the negative welfare impacts on fuel poor households than on the average Styrian household, in particular if they live in rural regions and if the fuel poverty definition includes transport expenditures. All analyzed compensation schemes achieve similar carbon emission reductions as uncompensated carbon pricing, but additionally reduce inequality and increase overall welfare. In particular, they increase welfare among poor households and dampen the negative welfare impacts of uncompensated carbon pricing on the wealthiest. Accounting for low income in fuel poverty definitions and compensation schemes yields the highest welfare benefits. Price changes in motor fuels are the dominant impact channel, emphasizing the importance of considering transport in the debate on vulnerability to carbon pricing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72914,"journal":{"name":"Energy and climate change","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100177"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy and climate change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666278725000042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Carbon pricing is a core pillar in the policy mix required for the transition to carbon neutrality. Carbon pricing raises energy prices and related service costs, but distributes the burden unequally among the population, which though can be mitigated by accompanying compensation schemes. For the example of the Austrian Province of Styria, we analyze the impacts of national carbon pricing for heating and motor fuels. Using the Exact Affine Stone Index (EASI) demand system and applying different definitions of fuel poverty, we compare how five compensation schemes mitigate impacts on fuel poor households. Uncompensated carbon pricing has nearly twice the negative welfare impacts on fuel poor households than on the average Styrian household, in particular if they live in rural regions and if the fuel poverty definition includes transport expenditures. All analyzed compensation schemes achieve similar carbon emission reductions as uncompensated carbon pricing, but additionally reduce inequality and increase overall welfare. In particular, they increase welfare among poor households and dampen the negative welfare impacts of uncompensated carbon pricing on the wealthiest. Accounting for low income in fuel poverty definitions and compensation schemes yields the highest welfare benefits. Price changes in motor fuels are the dominant impact channel, emphasizing the importance of considering transport in the debate on vulnerability to carbon pricing.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy and climate change
Energy and climate change Global and Planetary Change, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信