Article

The costs of climate policies in a second-best world with labour market imperfections

Climate Policy - CLIM POLICY 01/2011; 11(1). DOI: 10.3763/cpol.2009.0012

ABSTRACT This article explores the critical role of labour market imperfections in climate stabilisation costs formation. To do so, we use a dynamic recursive energy-economy model that represents a second best world with market imperfections and short-run adjustments constraints along a long-term growth path. We show that the degree of rigidity of the labour markets is a central parameter and we conduct a systematic sensitivity analysis of the model results to this parameter. When labour markets are represented as highly flexible, the model results are in the usual range of existing literature, i.e. less than 2% GDP losses in 2030 for a stabilisation target at 550ppm CO 2 equivalent. But when labour markets rigidities are accounted for, mitigation costs increase dramatically. In a second time, the article identifies accompanying measures, namely labour subsidies, which guarantees against the risk of large stabilisation costs in the case of high rigidities of the labour markets. That vision complements the usual view that mitigation is a long-term matter that depends on technology, innovation, investment and behavioural change. Here we add the warning that mitigation is also a shorter-term issue and a matter of transition on the labour market.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
75 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most CO2 abatement policies reduce the demand for fossil fuels and therefore their price in international markets. If these policies are not global, this price decrease raises emissions in countries without CO2 abatement policies, generating “carbon leakage”. On the other hand, if the countries which abate CO2 emissions are net fossil fuel importers, they benefit from this price decrease, which reduces the abatement cost. In contrast, CO2 capture and storage (CCS) does not reduce fossil fuel demand, therefore it generates neither this type of leakage nor this negative feedback on abatement costs. We quantify these effects with the global hybrid general equilibrium model Imaclim-R and show that they are quantitatively important. Indeed, for a given unilateral abatement in OECD countries, leakage is more than halved in a scenario with CCS included among the abatement options, compared to a scenario prohibiting CCS. We show that the main reason for this difference in leakage is the above-mentioned international fossil fuel price feedback. This article does not intend to assess the desirability of CCS, which has many other pros and cons. It just identifies a consequence of CCS that should be taken into account, together with many others, when deciding to what extent CCS should be developed.
    02/2011;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper analyzes the transition costs of moving towards a low carbon society when the second-best nature of the economy is accounted for. We emphasize the consequences on mitigation costs of considering the interplay between a ) technical systems inertia, including slow infrastructure turnover in transportation and construction; and b ) imperfect foresight influencing investment decisions. To this end, the hybrid general equilibrium modeling framework I maclim- R is employed as it allows for transitory partial adjustments of the economy and captures their impact on the dynamics of economic growth. The modeling exercise quantitatively emphasizes the a) specific risks that the interplay between inertia and imperfect foresight leads to high macroeconomic costs of carbon abatement measures; b) opportunities of co-benefits from climate policies permitted by the correction of sub-optimalities in the reference scenarios. The article draws insights for the framing of future climate architectures by studying the role of measures that act complementarily to carbon pricing in the transport sector. In particular, reallocating public investment towards low-carbon transport infrastructure significantly reduces the overall macroeconomic costs of a given GHG stabilization target and even creates the room for long-term net economic benefits from climate policies.
    Climatic Change 01/2012; 114(1):101-120. · 3.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explores a situation of staged accession to a global climate policy regime from the current situation of regionally fragmented and moderate climate action. The analysis is based on scenarios in which a front runner coalition – the EU or the EU and China – embarks on immediate ambitious climate action while the rest of the world makes a transition to a global climate regime between 2030 and 2050. We assume that the ensuing regime involves strong mitigation efforts but does not require late joiners to compensate for their initially higher emissions. Thus, climate targets are relaxed, and although staged accession can achieve significant reductions of global warming, the resulting climate outcome is unlikely to be consistent with the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees. The addition of China to the front runner coalition can reduce pre-2050 excess emissions by 20–30%, increasing the likelihood of staying below 2 degrees. Not accounting for potential co-benefits, the cost of front runner action is found to be lower for the EU than for China. Regions that delay their accession to the climate regime face a trade-off between reduced short term costs and higher transitional requirements due to larger carbon lock-ins and more rapidly increasing carbon prices during the accession period.
    Technological Forecasting and Social Change 01/2013; · 1.71 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
29 Downloads
Available from
May 22, 2014