{"title":"通过检查:重叠的气候政策如何改变加州的成本分配","authors":"William A. Scott","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Energy and transportation services represent a significant portion of household budgets, particularly for low-income households. Climate policies that increase the cost of energy and transportation services can lead to disparate impacts across income and demographic groups. When multiple overlapping climate policies are in place, they may interact to compound or shift the distribution of costs. This study employs household expenditure microdata from the Consumer Expenditure Survey to examine the distributional costs of two overlapping policies in California: the cap-and-trade program (CAT) and the low carbon fuel standard (LCFS). Findings indicate that the LCFS is regressive and that the CAT, while highly regressive at initial incidence, is similar in net incidence to the LCFS after returning some revenue to households through utility rebates. Yet the CAT program leads to greater differences in impacts on households within income groups, even exceeding differences between groups. Interactions between the two policies lead to higher costs for households across income deciles compared to achieving the same level of emissions reduction with the CAT alone. This suggests there is no equity-efficiency tradeoff in choosing between these policy instruments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 104119"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Passing the check: How overlapping climate policies shift the distribution of costs in California\",\"authors\":\"William A. Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Energy and transportation services represent a significant portion of household budgets, particularly for low-income households. Climate policies that increase the cost of energy and transportation services can lead to disparate impacts across income and demographic groups. When multiple overlapping climate policies are in place, they may interact to compound or shift the distribution of costs. This study employs household expenditure microdata from the Consumer Expenditure Survey to examine the distributional costs of two overlapping policies in California: the cap-and-trade program (CAT) and the low carbon fuel standard (LCFS). Findings indicate that the LCFS is regressive and that the CAT, while highly regressive at initial incidence, is similar in net incidence to the LCFS after returning some revenue to households through utility rebates. Yet the CAT program leads to greater differences in impacts on households within income groups, even exceeding differences between groups. Interactions between the two policies lead to higher costs for households across income deciles compared to achieving the same level of emissions reduction with the CAT alone. This suggests there is no equity-efficiency tradeoff in choosing between these policy instruments.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"125 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625002002\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625002002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Passing the check: How overlapping climate policies shift the distribution of costs in California
Energy and transportation services represent a significant portion of household budgets, particularly for low-income households. Climate policies that increase the cost of energy and transportation services can lead to disparate impacts across income and demographic groups. When multiple overlapping climate policies are in place, they may interact to compound or shift the distribution of costs. This study employs household expenditure microdata from the Consumer Expenditure Survey to examine the distributional costs of two overlapping policies in California: the cap-and-trade program (CAT) and the low carbon fuel standard (LCFS). Findings indicate that the LCFS is regressive and that the CAT, while highly regressive at initial incidence, is similar in net incidence to the LCFS after returning some revenue to households through utility rebates. Yet the CAT program leads to greater differences in impacts on households within income groups, even exceeding differences between groups. Interactions between the two policies lead to higher costs for households across income deciles compared to achieving the same level of emissions reduction with the CAT alone. This suggests there is no equity-efficiency tradeoff in choosing between these policy instruments.
期刊介绍:
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers.
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.