EMİSYON TİCARET SİSTEMLERİ VE KARBON VERGİLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI DEĞERLENDİRMESİ: KARBON FİYATLANDIRMASI YOLUYLA İKLİM DEĞİŞİKLİĞİNİN AZALTILMASINA İLİŞKİN UYGULAMALAR

Öz

İnsan kaynaklı iklim değişikliği, küresel ısınmaya, deniz seviyesinin yükselmesine, aşırı hava olaylarına yol açmakta, biyoçeşitlilik kaybına ve ekosistemlere zarar vermektedir. Bu sorunlarla mücadele etmek için bir politika stratejisi olarak karbon fiyatlandırması kullanılmaktadır. Bu strateji, sera gazı emisyonlarına maliyet atfeder ve bu emisyonların toplum ve çevre üzerindeki olumsuz etkilerini göz önünde bulundurarak emisyon azaltımını teşvik eder. Karbon fiyatlandırmasının uygulanmasında iki ana yöntem, karbon fiyatının piyasa tarafından belirlendiği emisyon ticaret sistemleri (ETS) ve karbon fiyatının önceden belirlendiği karbon vergisidir. Bu çalışma, iklim değişikliğine dönük düzenleyici önlemler olarak karbon vergilerini ve ETS'leri karşılaştırmaktadır. Politika tasarımı ve uygulamasının yönleri üzerine odaklanarak - verimlilik, politik dayanıklılık, politika tutarlılığı, esneklik ve uyum kabiliyeti, öngörülebilirlik ve çevresel kesinlik - çalışmanın ana argümanı, bu mekanizmalardaki fiyat oluşumunun farklı doğasına dayanır - karbon vergileri doğrudan fiyat belirlerken, ETS'ler fiyat belirleme için piyasa dinamiklerine bağlıdır. Bu temel farklılık, iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele politikalarının operasyonel dinamiklerini önemli ölçüde şekillendirir. Çalışma, ETS'lerin ve karbon vergilerinin kendine has güçlü ve zayıf yönlerini vurgularken, bu mekanizmaların alternatifler olarak değil, iklim değişikliğiyle mücadelede politika tasarımında sinerjik stratejiler olarak ele alınması gerektiğini ortaya koyar.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası Çevre Politikası
• Siyasa Tasarımı
• İklim Değişikliği
• Emisyon Ticaret Sistemleri
• Karbon Vergisi

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF EMISSIONS TRADING SYSTEMS AND CARBON TAXES: IMPLEMENTATIONS IN CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION THROUGH CARBON PRICING

Öz

Climate change, driven by human activities, results in global warming, sea level rise, extreme weather, biodiversity loss, and ecosystem damage. To combat these issues, carbon pricing is being utilized. This policy strategy assigns costs to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, considering their negative impact on society and the environment, thus encouraging reduction of emissions. Two main methods of implementing carbon pricing are emissions trading systems (ETS), where the carbon price is market-determined, and carbon tax, where the carbon price is pre-established. This study compares carbon taxes and ETSs as regulatory measures for mitigating climate change. Focusing on aspects of policy design and implementation— efficiency, political durability, policy consistency, flexibility and adaptability, predictability, and environmental certainty—the main argument of the study hinges on the distinct nature of price formation in these mechanisms - carbon taxes define prices directly, whereas ETSs rely on market dynamics for price determination. This fundamental divergence significantly shapes the operational dynamics of climate mitigation policies. The study highlights the unique strengths and limitations inherent in ETSs and carbon taxes, underscoring the necessity of viewing these mechanisms not as alternatives but as synergistic strategies for a policy design in combating climate change.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International Environmental Politics
• Policy Design
• Climate Change
• Emission Trading Systems
• Carbon Taxes

Kaynakça

1. Abraham-Dukuma, M. C. (2021). Dirty to clean energy: Exploring ‘oil and gas majors transitioning’. The Extractive Industries and Society, 8(3), 100936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2021.100936
2. Aldy, J. E., Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. N. (2003). Thirteen plus one: A comparison of global climate policy architectures. Climate Policy, 3(4), 373–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clipol.2003.09.004
3. Aldy, J. E., & Stavins, R. N. (2012). The Promise and Problems of Pricing Carbon: Theory and Experience. The Journal of Environment & Development, 21(2), 152–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496512442508
4. Andersson, J. J. (2019). Carbon Taxes and CO2 Emissions: Sweden as a Case Study. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 11(4), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170144
5. Bumpus, A. G. (2015). Firm responses to a carbon price: Corporate decision making under British Columbia’s carbon tax. Climate Policy, 15(4), 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2014.937389
6. Calel, R., & Dechezleprêtre, A. (2016). Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence From the European Carbon Market. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 98(1), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00470
7. Chuang, J., Lien, H.-L., Roche, A. K., Liao, P.-H., & Den, W. (2019). Consolidated Climate Markets Mechanism Analysis—Case Studies of China, Japan, and Taiwan. Sustainability, 11(22), 6478. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226478
8. Colmer, J., Martin, R., Muûls, M., & Wagner, U. (2020). Does Pricing Carbon Mitigate Climate Change? Firm-Level Evidence From the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. SSRN Electronic Journal, 232. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3725482

9. Compernolle, T., Kort, P. M., & Thijssen, J. (2022). The Effectiveness of Carbon Pricing: The Role of Diversification in a Firm’s Investment Decision. Energy Economics, 112, 106115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106115
10. Conefrey, T., Fitz Gerald, J. D., Valeri, L. M., & Tol, R. S. J. (2013). The impact of a carbon tax on economic growth and carbon dioxide emissions in Ireland. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(7), 934–952. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.709467
11. Crowley, K. (2017). Up and down with climate politics 2013–2016: The repeal of carbon pricing in Australia. WIREs Climate Change, 8(3), e458. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.458
12. Cui, J., Zhang, J., & Zheng, Y. (2018). Carbon Pricing Induces Innovation: Evidence from China’s Regional Carbon Market Pilots. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 108, 453–457. https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20181027
13. Doda, B. (2016). How to price carbon in good times … and bad! WIREs Climate Change, 7(1), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.375
14. Environment and Climate Change Canada. (2021, August 5). Update to the Pan-Canadian Approach to Carbon Pollution Pricing 2023-2030 [Guidance - legislative]. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work/carbon-pollution-pricing-federal-benchmark-information/federal-benchmark-2023-2030.html
15. European Commission. (2020, November 26). Climate change – updating the EU emissions trading system (ETS). Climate Change – Updating the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12660-Climate-change-updating-the-EU-emissions-trading-system-ETS-_en
16. European Commission. (2023a). Emissions cap and allowances. https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/emissions-cap-and-allowances_en
17. European Commission. (2023b). Revision for phase 4 (2021-2030). https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets/revision-phase-4-2021-2030_en
18. Evans, N., Duwe, M., & Velten, E. K. (2023). Policy Consistency: What it means, how to measure it, and links with other processes. Ecologic Institute, Berlin. https://www.ecologic.eu/19265
19. Falkner, R. (2001). Business Conflict and U.S. International Environmental Policy: Ozone, Climate, and Biodiversity. In P. G. Harris (Ed.), The Environment, International Relations, and U.S. Foreign Policy (pp. 152–174). Georgetown University Press.
20. Falkner, R. (2005). The Business of Ozone Layer Protection: Corporate Power in Regime Evolution. In D. L. Levy & P. J. Newell (Eds.), The Business of Global Environmental Governance (pp. 105–134). MIT Press.
21. Feng, Z.-H., Zou, L.-L., & Wei, Y.-M. (2011). Carbon price volatility: Evidence from EU ETS. Applied Energy, 88(3), 590–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.06.017
22. Flores, B., & Mardones, C. (2017). Evaluation of a CO2 Tax in Chile: Emissions Reduction or Design Problems? Latin American Research Review, 52(3), 334–343. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.25222/larr.33
23. Flues, F., & Dender, K. van. (2020). Carbon pricing design: Effectiveness, efficiency and feasibility. OECD Environment Working Papers, 48. https://doi.org/10.1787/91ad6a1e-en
24. Green, J. F. (2021). Does carbon pricing reduce emissions? A review of ex-post analyses. Environmental Research Letters, 16(4), 043004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abdae9
25. Grubel, J. (2012). Australian PM campaigns to sell unpopular carbon tax. Reuters. https://web.archive.org/web/20120824211148/http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/us-australia-carbon-idUSBRE85T0LH20120702
26. Gulbrandsen, L. H., & Wettestad, J. (2022). Carbon Pricing Under Pressure: Withering Markets? Politics and Governance, 10(1), 230–234. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i1.5437
27. Haites, E. (2015). Experience with linking greenhouse gas emissions trading systems. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 5(3), 246–260. https://doi.org/10.1002/wene.191
28. Haites, E. (2018). Carbon taxes and greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: What have we learned? Climate Policy, 18(8), 955–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1492897
29. Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162(June), 1243–1248. International Carbon Action Partnership. (2021, March 18). USA - Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). https://icapcarbonaction.com/en/ets/usa-regional-greenhouse-gas-initiative-rggi
30. IPCC. (2022). Climate Change 2022 Mitigation of Climate Change Summary for Policymakers (Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). UNEP/WMO.
31. Isser, S. N. (2016). A Review of Carbon Markets: EU-ETS, RGGI, California, the Clean Power Plan and the Paris Agreement. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2827620
32. Johnstone, N., Haščič, I., & Kalamova, M. (2010). Environmental Policy Design Characteristics and Technological Innovation. OECD Environment Working Papers, 16. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmjstwtqwhd-en
33. Jordan, A. J., & Moore, B. (2023). The durability–flexibility dialectic: The evolution of decarbonisation policies in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 30(3), 425–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2042721 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
34. Change. (1997). United Nations Treaty Series, 2303(30822), 162.
35. Madsen, H. L., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2021). Sustainable visioning: Re-framing strategic vision to enable a sustainable corporate transformation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 288, 125602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125602
36. Martin, R., Muûls, M., & Wagner, U. (2016). The Impact of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme on Regulated Firms: What Is the Evidence After Ten Years? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rev016
37. Metcalf, G. E. (2021). Carbon Taxes in Theory and Practice. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 13(1), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-102519-113630
38. Metcalf, G. E., & Weisbach, D. (2013). Carbon Taxes. In J. F. Shogren (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Energy, Natural Resource, and Environmental Economics (pp. 9–14). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375067-9.00126-1
39. Mirzaee Ghazani, M., & Jafari, M. A. (2021). The efficiency of CO2 market in the phase III EU ETS: analyzing in the context of a dynamic approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(43), 61080–61095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15044-5
40. Morris, J. (2022). Carbon Pricing. MIT Climate Portal. https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/carbon-pricing
41. Müller, P., & Slominski, P. (2016). Theorizing third country agency in EU rule transfer: Linking the EU Emission Trading System with Norway, Switzerland and Australia. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(6), 814–832. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1066838
42. Narassimhan, E., Gallagher, K. S., Koester, S. W., & Alejo, J. S. B. (2018). Carbon Pricing in Practice: A Review of Existing Emissions Trading Systems. Climate Policy, 18(8), 967–991. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1467827
43. Parson, E. A. (2003). Protecting the Ozone Layer: Science and Strategy. Oxford University Press.
44. Pereira, A. M., Pereira, R. M., & Rodrigues, P. G. (2016). A new carbon tax in Portugal: A missed opportunity to achieve the triple dividend? Energy Policy, 93, 110–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.03.002
45. Perry, N., Rosewarne, S., & White, G. (2013). Clean energy policy: Taxing carbon and the illusion of the equity objective. Ecological Economics, 90, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.018
46. Pigou, A. C. (1920). The Economics of Welfare. Macmillan.
47. Rabe, B. G. (2016). The Durability of Carbon Cap-and-Trade Policy. Governance, 29(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12151
48. RGGI. (2020). RGGI States Welcome Virginia as Its CO2 Regulation Is Finalized. https://www.rggi.org/sites/default/files/Uploads/Press-Releases/2020_07_08_VA_Announcement_Release.pdf
49. RGGI. (2023). Elements of RGGI | RGGI, Inc. https://www.rggi.org/program-overview-and-design/elements
50. Rhodes, E., Scott, W. A., & Jaccard, M. (2021). Designing flexible regulations to mitigate climate change: A cross-country comparative policy analysis. Energy Policy, 156, 112419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112419
51. Robson, A. (2014). Australia’s Carbon Tax: An Economic Evaluation. Economic Affairs, 34(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecaf.12061
52. Rousseau, S., & Proost, S. (2009). The relative efficiency of market-based environmental policy instruments with imperfect compliance. International Tax and Public Finance, 16(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-007-9043-y
53. Sandmo, A. (2016). Pigouvian Taxes. In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (pp. 1–4). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_2678-1
54. Shemkus, S. (2019, February 5). As states look to cut transportation emissions, RGGI offers a model—And room to improve. Energy News Network. http://energynews.us/2019/02/05/as-states-look-to-cut-transportation-emissions-rggi-offers-a-model-and-room-to-improve/
55. Sumner, J., Bird, L., & Dobos, H. (2011). Carbon taxes: A review of experience and policy design considerations. Climate Policy, 11(2), 922–943. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2010.0093
56. Taylor, L., & political. (2014, July 17). Australia kills off carbon tax. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/17/australia-kills-off-carbon-tax
57. Valdivia, C. D. (2014). The Role of EU-ETS Mechanism as Environmental Investment Promoter in Europe and Developing Countries. Revista Latinoamericana De Desarrollo Económico, 22, 85–133. https://doi.org/10.35319/lajed.20142282
58. van Asselt, H. (2016). The Design and Implementation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading. In K. R. Gray, R. Tarasofsky, & C. P. Carlarne (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Climate Change Law (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780199684601.003.0016
59. Verde, S. F., & Borghesi, S. (2022). The International Dimension of the EU Emissions Trading System: Bringing the Pieces Together. Environmental and Resource Economics, 83(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-022-00705-x
60. Vöhringer, F. (2012). Linking the Swiss Emissions Trading System with the EU ETS: Economic Effects of Regulatory Design Alternatives. Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, 148(2), 167–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03399365