Markets versus Regulation: The Efficiency and Distributional Impacts of U.S. Climate Policy Proposals
Markets versus Regulation: The Efficiency and Distributional Impacts of U.S. Climate Policy Proposals
复制标题
DOI：
10.5547/01956574.35.si1.11
复制
发表时间：
2014-05
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Rausch;V. Karplus
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Rausch;V. Karplus
在美国，监管措施已被证明是缓解气候变化的首选方法，而基于市场的政策几乎没有取得什么进展。本文使用一个按地区、收入类别和特定行业技术部署机会分析美国经济的模型，研究了监管与市场方法下经济影响的大小和分布。我们量化了国家对监管政策的反应的异质性，包括燃料经济性标准和清洁或可再生电力标准，并将其与针对二氧化碳或所有温室气体的总量管制和交易系统进行比较。我们发现，监管政策大大超过了成本的限额和交易制度在国家一级。我们进一步表明，监管政策产生了很大的成本差异，在地区和收入群体，这是夸大的困难，实施收入回收规定的监管政策设计。
Abstract Regulatory measures have proven the favored approach to climate change mitigation in the U.S., while market-based policies have gained little traction. Using a model that resolves the U.S. economy by region, income category, and sector-specific technology deployment opportunities, this paper studies the magnitude and distribution of economic impacts under regulatory versus market-based approaches. We quantify heterogeneity in the national response to regulatory policies, including a fuel economy standard and a clean or renewable electricity standard, and compare these to a cap-and-trade system targeting carbon dioxide or all greenhouse gases. We find that the regulatory policies substantially exceed the cost of a cap-and-trade system at the national level. We further show that the regulatory policies yield large cost disparities across regions and income groups, which are exaggerated by the difficulty of implementing revenue recycling provisions under regulatory policy designs.