碳定价:McKibbin的生态经济学视角?威尔考森提议澳大利亚

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting
Judith Mcneill, J. Williams
{"title":"碳定价:McKibbin的生态经济学视角?威尔考森提议澳大利亚","authors":"Judith Mcneill, J. Williams","doi":"10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many countries are contemplating the design of institutions to address 'the greatest market failure the world has ever seen' (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, p.xviii). Australia is currently considering introducing a carbon trading scheme and prominent amongst the proposals being discussed is the 'McKibbin?Wilcoxen hybrid scheme' (McKibbin and Wilcoxen, 2002, 2006, 2007). We examine the literature on this proposal. We conclude that provided long-term goals are not sacrificed, there is much to admire in the institutional arrangements suggested. Short-term permits can address concerns about employment impacts, whilst long-term permits facilitate business planning. Nevertheless, we do seriously question the theoretical framework advanced to justify the hybrid structure ? a framework that is also used in some sections of Stern (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) and elsewhere. Short- and long-run optimal abatement theories are neither credible nor necessary. In an Australian context, we also argue that there is a strong case for supplementing credits with carbon sinks created in the agricultural sector.","PeriodicalId":35410,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pricing carbon: an ecological economics perspective on the McKibbin?Wilcoxen proposal for Australia\",\"authors\":\"Judith Mcneill, J. Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many countries are contemplating the design of institutions to address 'the greatest market failure the world has ever seen' (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, p.xviii). Australia is currently considering introducing a carbon trading scheme and prominent amongst the proposals being discussed is the 'McKibbin?Wilcoxen hybrid scheme' (McKibbin and Wilcoxen, 2002, 2006, 2007). We examine the literature on this proposal. We conclude that provided long-term goals are not sacrificed, there is much to admire in the institutional arrangements suggested. Short-term permits can address concerns about employment impacts, whilst long-term permits facilitate business planning. Nevertheless, we do seriously question the theoretical framework advanced to justify the hybrid structure ? a framework that is also used in some sections of Stern (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) and elsewhere. Short- and long-run optimal abatement theories are neither credible nor necessary. In an Australian context, we also argue that there is a strong case for supplementing credits with carbon sinks created in the agricultural sector.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEWE.2007.015291","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多国家正在考虑设计制度来解决“世界上所见过的最大的市场失灵”(Stern, N.(2007)《气候变化经济学》)。英国剑桥:剑桥大学出版社,第18页)。澳大利亚目前正在考虑引入一项碳交易计划,在正在讨论的提案中,最突出的是“麦基宾?Wilcoxen混合方案”(McKibbin and Wilcoxen, 2002,2006,2007)。我们查阅了有关这一建议的文献。我们的结论是,只要不牺牲长期目标,建议的制度安排有很多值得钦佩的地方。短期许可证可以解决对就业的影响,而长期许可证则有助于商业规划。然而,我们确实严重质疑为证明混合结构的合理性而提出的理论框架。斯特恩(Stern, N., 2007)《气候变化经济学》的某些章节也使用了这个框架。剑桥,英国:剑桥大学出版社)和其他地方。短期和长期最优减排理论既不可信,也没有必要。在澳大利亚的背景下,我们还认为,有一个强有力的案例来补充信用与农业部门创造的碳汇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pricing carbon: an ecological economics perspective on the McKibbin?Wilcoxen proposal for Australia
Many countries are contemplating the design of institutions to address 'the greatest market failure the world has ever seen' (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, p.xviii). Australia is currently considering introducing a carbon trading scheme and prominent amongst the proposals being discussed is the 'McKibbin?Wilcoxen hybrid scheme' (McKibbin and Wilcoxen, 2002, 2006, 2007). We examine the literature on this proposal. We conclude that provided long-term goals are not sacrificed, there is much to admire in the institutional arrangements suggested. Short-term permits can address concerns about employment impacts, whilst long-term permits facilitate business planning. Nevertheless, we do seriously question the theoretical framework advanced to justify the hybrid structure ? a framework that is also used in some sections of Stern (Stern, N. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) and elsewhere. Short- and long-run optimal abatement theories are neither credible nor necessary. In an Australian context, we also argue that there is a strong case for supplementing credits with carbon sinks created in the agricultural sector.
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 Environment, Workplace and Employment
International Journal of Environment, Workplace and Employment Business, Management and Accounting-Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: IJEWM is a refereed reference and authoritative source of information in the field of environmental and waste management Together with its sister publications IJEP, IJETM and IJGEnvI, it provides a comprehensive coverage of environmental issues. It covers both engineering/technical and management solutions.
×
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