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

Yıl 2024, Sayı: Sustainability and Green Economics Special Issue, 18 - 35, 13.06.2024

Sefa Öztürk

https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.1413634

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

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

Kaynakça

• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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.
• 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.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Change. (1997). United Nations Treaty Series, 2303(30822), 162.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Morris, J. (2022). Carbon Pricing. MIT Climate Portal. https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/carbon-pricing
• 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
• 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
• Parson, E. A. (2003). Protecting the Ozone Layer: Science and Strategy. Oxford University Press.
• 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
• 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
• Pigou, A. C. (1920). The Economics of Welfare. Macmillan.
• Rabe, B. G. (2016). The Durability of Carbon Cap-and-Trade Policy. Governance, 29(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12151
• 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
• RGGI. (2023). Elements of RGGI | RGGI, Inc. https://www.rggi.org/program-overview-and-design/elements
• 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
• Robson, A. (2014). Australia’s Carbon Tax: An Economic Evaluation. Economic Affairs, 34(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecaf.12061
• 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
• 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
• 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/
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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