碳税与碳限额交易:在跨区域生产中实施碳边境税

IF 9.8 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL
Jiawen Hua , Kai Wang , Jun Lin , Yanjun Qian
{"title":"碳税与碳限额交易:在跨区域生产中实施碳边境税","authors":"Jiawen Hua ,&nbsp;Kai Wang ,&nbsp;Jun Lin ,&nbsp;Yanjun Qian","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies, as the primary carbon pricing instruments, are designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, inconsistent global regulations for emissions may lead to emissions leakage, as firms strategically relocate production to regions with less stringent controls. This study contributes to existing research by evaluating Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies in conjunction with the impending Carbon Border Tax (CBT), designed to mitigate emissions leakage from cross-regional production. Specifically, we examine a firm's equilibrium strategies in investment and production in both domestic and offshore regions under two different carbon pricing instruments while subject to the CBT. The analysis includes a comparative assessment of technology investment, total greenhouse gas emissions, and social welfare. Our findings indicate that the Carbon Tax policy can be associated with lower emission intensity, albeit generating greater total emissions compared to the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy. Notably, the CBT can serve as an equivalent stimulant for technology investment and a reducer of aggregate emissions under both pricing instruments. Moreover, the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy proves more beneficial in terms of social welfare when the firm's optimal strategy is confined to either domestic or offshore production. Conversely, the Carbon Tax policy yields higher social welfare in cases of high emission prices when the firm's optimal strategy is cross-regional production. The introduction of the CBT enlarges the set of conditions under which the Carbon Tax policy proves more advantageous for social welfare.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14287,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Production Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carbon Tax vs. Carbon Cap-and-Trade: Implementation of carbon border tax in cross-regional production\",\"authors\":\"Jiawen Hua ,&nbsp;Kai Wang ,&nbsp;Jun Lin ,&nbsp;Yanjun Qian\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijpe.2024.109317\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies, as the primary carbon pricing instruments, are designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, inconsistent global regulations for emissions may lead to emissions leakage, as firms strategically relocate production to regions with less stringent controls. This study contributes to existing research by evaluating Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies in conjunction with the impending Carbon Border Tax (CBT), designed to mitigate emissions leakage from cross-regional production. Specifically, we examine a firm's equilibrium strategies in investment and production in both domestic and offshore regions under two different carbon pricing instruments while subject to the CBT. The analysis includes a comparative assessment of technology investment, total greenhouse gas emissions, and social welfare. Our findings indicate that the Carbon Tax policy can be associated with lower emission intensity, albeit generating greater total emissions compared to the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy. Notably, the CBT can serve as an equivalent stimulant for technology investment and a reducer of aggregate emissions under both pricing instruments. Moreover, the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy proves more beneficial in terms of social welfare when the firm's optimal strategy is confined to either domestic or offshore production. Conversely, the Carbon Tax policy yields higher social welfare in cases of high emission prices when the firm's optimal strategy is cross-regional production. The introduction of the CBT enlarges the set of conditions under which the Carbon Tax policy proves more advantageous for social welfare.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14287,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Production Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Production Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527324001749\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Production Economics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527324001749","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

碳税和碳限额交易政策作为主要的碳定价工具,旨在减少温室气体排放。然而,全球排放法规的不一致可能会导致排放泄漏,因为企业会战略性地将生产迁往管制较松的地区。本研究将碳税和碳限额交易政策与即将实施的碳边境税(CBT)结合起来进行评估,旨在减少跨区域生产的排放泄漏,从而为现有研究做出贡献。具体来说,我们研究了在两种不同的碳定价工具下,企业在国内和离岸地区的投资和生产均衡策略,同时受制于 CBT。分析包括对技术投资、温室气体排放总量和社会福利的比较评估。我们的研究结果表明,与碳排放总量控制和交易政策相比,碳税政策可以降低排放强度,尽管会产生更大的排放总量。值得注意的是,在两种定价工具下,碳税政策都能起到促进技术投资和减少总排放量的作用。此外,当企业的最优战略仅限于国内或海外生产时,碳排放总量控制与交易政策在社会福利方面更为有利。相反,当企业的最优战略是跨区域生产时,碳税政策在高排放价格的情况下会产生更高的社会福利。CBT 的引入扩大了碳税政策对社会福利更有利的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Carbon Tax vs. Carbon Cap-and-Trade: Implementation of carbon border tax in cross-regional production

Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies, as the primary carbon pricing instruments, are designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, inconsistent global regulations for emissions may lead to emissions leakage, as firms strategically relocate production to regions with less stringent controls. This study contributes to existing research by evaluating Carbon Tax and Carbon Cap-and-Trade policies in conjunction with the impending Carbon Border Tax (CBT), designed to mitigate emissions leakage from cross-regional production. Specifically, we examine a firm's equilibrium strategies in investment and production in both domestic and offshore regions under two different carbon pricing instruments while subject to the CBT. The analysis includes a comparative assessment of technology investment, total greenhouse gas emissions, and social welfare. Our findings indicate that the Carbon Tax policy can be associated with lower emission intensity, albeit generating greater total emissions compared to the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy. Notably, the CBT can serve as an equivalent stimulant for technology investment and a reducer of aggregate emissions under both pricing instruments. Moreover, the Carbon Cap-and-Trade policy proves more beneficial in terms of social welfare when the firm's optimal strategy is confined to either domestic or offshore production. Conversely, the Carbon Tax policy yields higher social welfare in cases of high emission prices when the firm's optimal strategy is cross-regional production. The introduction of the CBT enlarges the set of conditions under which the Carbon Tax policy proves more advantageous for social welfare.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Production Economics
International Journal of Production Economics 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
266
审稿时长
52 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Production Economics focuses on the interface between engineering and management. It covers all aspects of manufacturing and process industries, as well as production in general. The journal is interdisciplinary, considering activities throughout the product life cycle and material flow cycle. It aims to disseminate knowledge for improving industrial practice and strengthening the theoretical base for decision making. The journal serves as a forum for exchanging ideas and presenting new developments in theory and application, combining academic standards with practical value for industrial applications.
×
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