世界排放大国CO2排放和GDP的格兰杰因果分析及其对国际气候治理的影响和意义

基于1990—2015年世界前20个排放大国碳排放量和国内生产总值（GDP）的时间序列数据,采用协整分析、格兰杰因果检验,对主要排放大国碳排放与经济增长之间的关系进行了实证分析。通过协整分析得出大多数国家的碳排放量与经济增长之间存在长期均衡关系;碳排放量和GDP的格兰杰检验结果显示,大多数世界排放大国碳排放与经济增长之间存在单向因果关系。发达国家主要表现为经济增长是碳排放的格兰杰原因,发展中国家则主要表现为碳排放是经济增长的格兰杰原因。研究结果反映了发达国家和发展中国家在碳减排问题上的阶段性特征,碳减排对发展中国家经济发展的负面影响明显大于发达国家。基于格兰杰因果分析结果,国际气候治理进程中关于要求发展中国家现阶段提出大幅减排目标的诉求不符合发展中国家发展阶段特征,可能影响发展中国家经济发展的正常秩序和规律。发达国家基于历史排放责任、发展阶段和能力,都应该带头开展减排行动,并帮助发展中国家实现转型、升级发展,降低经济发展对碳排放的依赖。国际气候治理需要根据并考虑不同国家的发展需求和特征,形成国际合作制度安排,实现社会经济发展与全球气候治理的协同。     

碳交易政策的经济影响:以广东省为例

通过构建广东省两区域动态模型,对广东省碳交易及其他政策措施进行定量评估,分析实施可调控总量的碳交易政策机制对广东省及参与交易部门的经济影响。研究结果表明,按照减排情景到2015年广东完成19.5%的碳强度下降目标,相比基准情景,GDP将减少0.7%;按照强减排情景到2015年将完成20.5%的碳强度下降目标,相比基准情景GDP将减少0.9%;如果在强减排情景的基础上实施碳交易政策,GDP相对基准情景减少0.8%,到2015年实施碳交易政策可减少GDP损失约90亿元,说明广东建立碳排放权交易机制能够发挥支持经济发展和节能减碳双赢的作用。     

碳税政策的减排效果与经济影响

采用基于动态可计算一般均衡模型（CGE）构建的能源－环境－经济模型,模拟了在考虑能源利用效率提高的基础上,不同碳税税率以及碳税收入使用方式的减排效果及对经济的影响。结果表明,与基准情景相比,如果碳税收入直接归政府所有,征收30、60、90元/t CO₂碳税,2020年的减排率分别为5.56%、10.45%和14.74%,GDP损失率分别为0.04%、0.10%和0.18%。征收碳税可实现的减排量,分别相当于实现2020年CO₂排放强度比2005年下降40%的目标所需减排量的9.9%、18.6%和26.2%。将碳税收入返还给企业和居民,能在一定程度上缓解对企业和居民的负面影响。     

全球气候模式对宁夏区域未来气候变化的情景模拟分析

利用多个全球气候模式(GCM)的情景模拟结果分析只考虑温室气体效应的IS92a GG情景和同时考虑温室气体效应和硫化物气溶胶辐射效应的IS92aGS情景以及SRESA2、B2情景下宁夏区域21世纪地面气温和降水量的可能变化,并进行不确定性分析。气候基准时段(1961~1990年)模拟结果与观测资料的对比分析表明,GCM对宁夏气候具有一定的模拟能力;整体上讲,GCM对地面气温的模拟值偏低,对降水量的模拟值偏高,其中ECHAM4和HadCM3对宁夏基准时段地面气温和降水量的模拟结果与观测比较接近。各GCM模拟值的平均结果显示,4种温室气体排放情景下21世纪宁夏区域气温持续升高,至21世纪末宁夏升温幅度可达4~6℃,与全国平均的增温幅度大致相当;与升温趋势相应的是降水量的增加,但降水变化呈现出很大的波动性,至21世纪末宁夏的降水变化幅度可达10%~40%。各个GCM模拟的宁夏气候变化的总趋势是一致的,但各模式在不同情景下模拟结果的差异很大,存在较大的不确定性。     

全球升温1.5℃和2.0℃情景下淮河上游干流径流量研究

基于ISI-MIP（The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Inter-comparison Project）推荐使用的5个全球气候模式数据(HadGEM2-ES,GFDL-ESM2M,MIROC-ESM-CHEM,Nor-ESM1-M,IPSL-CM5ALR),驱动SWIM（Soil and Water Integrated Model）水文模型,研究全球升温1.5℃和2.0℃情景下淮河上游干流径流量变化,得出结论：(1)淮河上游干流径流量年际变化在2种升温情景下均呈先减小后增加趋势。全球升温1.5℃时年径流量较基准期(1986—2005年)增长9.5%,而升温2.0℃情景下涨幅更明显,高达17%。(2) 4个季节径流量在2种升温情景下较基准期均有增长,其中春季涨幅最明显,达24.4%,夏、秋、冬季涨幅分别为7.1%、16.1%、13.5%。全球升温2.0℃时淮河上游干流径流量在4个季节较基准期增长率均大于全球升温1.5℃时。(3)不同气候模式输出日径流量最大值相差较大而平均值相差较小。未来2种升温情景日径流量超过王家坝闸设计流量的日次较基准期均有增加,尤其升温2.0℃情景较基准期增多22次,较升温1.5℃情景多5.8次,表明未来升温2.0℃情景下淮河上游出现极端径流事件的可能性进一步增大。     

基于CGE模型的碳税政策模拟——以广东省为例

科学设置碳税政策是控制二氧化碳排放量和推动能源结构优化的重要基础,文中以广东省为例,利用2012年的广东省投入产出表、广东统计年鉴、广东财政年鉴、中国统计年鉴等数据构建社会核算矩阵,通过构建静态的可计算一般均衡模型（CGE),进行区域的碳税政策模拟,分析不同程度的碳税税率对化石能源消费量及各宏观经济变量的影响。结果表明：征收碳税对减排效果有明显的正向作用,当碳税水平为60元/t时,广东省减排效果为3.90%;在碳税定价上,60元/t较为合适;减排贡献率最高的化石能源为煤炭,其次为石油,最低为天然气;碳税冲击下能源消费量下降,最明显的为煤炭,其次是火电;碳税冲击也能显著减少各部门对煤炭的消费量;碳税政策对广东省GDP和社会福利有负向作用,但对总体碳排放强度有正向作用。未来广东省应严格控制煤炭消费量,同时对火电部门进行低碳改造。     

IPCC影响评估中的社会经济新情景（SSPs）进展

气候变化情景在全球和区域气候变化预估中得到广泛应用,温室气体排放情景是气候模拟的基础,影响温室气体排放的社会经济驱动因素,如人口增长、经济发展、技术进步、环境条件、社会管理等假设组成了社会经济情景.IPCC先后发展了SA90、IS92、SRES等情景,应用于历次评估报告.     

城市化、产业结构、能源消费、经济增长与碳排放的关联性分析——基于中国省际收入水平异质性的实证研究

在全国推崇节能减排,寻求低碳经济发展的大环境下,探究不同收入水平下各影响因子与碳排放的关联性有助于区域异质性碳减排政策的制定。根据2002—2016年的经济发展水平数据,将中国30个省及直辖市（不包含西藏及港、澳、台地区）划分为4个不同收入水平,分别建立面板向量自回归（PVAR）模型,并运用面板格兰杰因果检验、脉冲响应和方差分解探究城市化、产业结构、能源消费、经济增长与碳排放之间的关联性。研究结果表明,处于不同收入水平下的省份各影响因子与碳排放之间的关系存在异质性。收入水平较高的省份当前城市化水平已产生显著的减排效应,而欠发达地区仍处于城市化进程加速碳排放阶段;4个收入水平下能源消费均会长期影响碳排放,但欠发达地区更加需要摆脱能源依赖的经济发展路径,并且提高能源利用率从而降低碳排放;非高收入水平省份产业结构对碳排放造成的影响明显高于高收入水平省份。此外,实证结果表明,中国仍处于碳排放与经济发展的同步增长阶段,减排政策将会对经济增长产生负向反馈,故现有减排路径的选择需要高度审慎的设计与实施。     

欧盟航空碳税及其国际影响

根据当前欧盟征收国际航空碳税政策的国际环境,介绍欧盟航空碳税的历史沿革、具体政策、二氧化碳排放监测方法,就各国反应及其国际影响进行分析.欧盟航空碳税可能会导致全球航空业成本增加,并最终转嫁给消费者;欧盟航空碳税对发达国家航空公司影响较小,而对发展中国家的航空公司影响较大.鉴于欧盟航空碳税对中国航空业的影响,建议尽早制定相关的碳排放标准,维护中国应有的发展权与话语权.     

全球升温1.5℃和2.0℃情景下中国乡村振兴核心区极端降水的变化特征北大核心CSCD

中国乡村振兴核心区生态环境较脆弱,暴雨洪涝等气象灾害频发,在此背景下,定量、科学地评估乡村振兴核心区全球升温情景下极端降水的变化特征,能够为乡村振兴核心区防止因灾返贫策略等的制定提供一定的科学依据。本研究基于CMIP6(Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6)气候模式下不同SSPs-RCPs(Shared Socioeconomic Pathways-Representative Concentration Pathways)组合情景模拟数据,对全球升温1.5℃和2.0℃情景下中国乡村振兴核心区极端降水事件频次、强度和持续时间的变化特征进行了分析。结果表明:(1)相对于基准期(1995~2014年),全球升温1.5℃情景下,乡村振兴核心区受极端降水影响明显增大,面积占比60.91%的区域极端降水频次增加,面积占比88.19%的区域极端降水强度增强,面积占比81.07%的区域极端降水持续时间增加;(2)全球升温2.0℃情景下,乡村振兴核心区三项极端降水指标变化与升温1.5℃情景下相似,相对于基准期有增加趋势,极端降水频次、强度和持续时间面积占比分别为55.78%、85.24%、79.33%;(3)从空间角度分析,全球升温1.5℃和2.0℃情景下,乡村振兴核心区中西部相较东部可能更易受极端降水的影响,西藏片区频次和持续时间增加显著,尤其值得关注;(4)当全球升温从1.5℃到2.0℃情景,乡村振兴核心区整体极端降水特征的变化未表现出明显增减趋势及空间特征。相比1.5℃较基准期的变化,2.0℃情景下极端降水频次、强度、持续时间的增加区域范围均缩小,但平均增幅均变大,对于发生极端降水事件的乡村振兴核心区区域而言可能面临更大的风险。     

Carbon taxes: a review of experience and policy design considerations

State and local governments in the USA are evaluating a wide range of policies to reduce carbon emissions, including carbon taxes, which have existed internationally for nearly 20 years. In this article, existing carbon tax policies, both internationally and in the USA, are reviewed, and carbon policy design and effectiveness are analysed. Design considerations include which sectors to tax, where to set the tax rate, how to use tax revenues, what the impact will be on consumers, and how to ensure that emissions reduction goals are achieved. Emissions reductions that are due to carbon taxes can be difficult to measure, although some jurisdictions quantify reductions in overall emissions, others examine impacts that are due to programmes funded by carbon tax revenues.     

Can developed economies combat dangerous anthropogenic climate change without near-term reductions from developing economies?

Developing economy greenhouse gas emissions are growing rapidly relative to developed economy emissions (Boden et al. 2010) and developing economies as a group have greater emissions than developed economies. These developments are expected to continue (U.S. Energy Information Administration 2010), which has led some to question the effectiveness of emissions mitigation in developed economies without a commitment to extensive mitigation action from developing economies. One often heard argument against proposed U.S. legislation to limit carbon emissions to mitigate climate change is that, without participation from large developing economies like China and India, stabilizing temperature at 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial (United Nations 2009), or even reducing global emissions levels, would be impossible (Driessen 2009; RPC Energy Facts 2009) or prohibitively expensive (Clarke et al. 2009). Here we show that significantly delayed action by rapidly developing countries is not a reason to forgo mitigation efforts in developed economies. This letter examines the effect of a scenario with no explicit international climate policy and two policy scenarios, full global action and a developing economy delay, on the probability of exceeding various global average temperature changes by 2100. This letter demonstrates that even when developing economies delay any mitigation efforts until 2050 the effect of action by developed economies will appreciably reduce the probability of more extreme levels of temperature change. This paper concludes that early carbon mitigation efforts by developed economies will considerably affect the distribution over future climate change, whether or not developing countries begin mitigation efforts in the near term.     

Justice and cost effectiveness of consumption-based versus production-based approaches in the case of unilateral climate policies

In recent years, climate policy under the United Nations system has been characterized by bottom-up, national approaches to climate mitigation. This raises concerns about the overall effectiveness of these mitigation policies, for example due to carbon leakage. In response to these concerns, authors have repeatedly suggested that policy makers consider a consumption-based climate policy approach. We analyze the potential merits of a switch to a consumption-based policy approach using the criteria of justice and economic efficiency. We argue that emissions must be understood as being contributed by both, consumers and producers, but that this fact does not by itself settle the question whether consumption or production ought to serve as the climate policy base. Rather, the perspective of justice necessitates an analysis of the distributive consequences of switching from a production- to a consumption-based policy.We find that both (global) cost-effectiveness and justice can be improved if the unilateral climate policies of industrialized countries are based on emissions from consumption. There are preconditions, however, the switch in the policy base must be accompanied by clean technology transfer, and if implemented by border carbon adjustments, import tax revenues need to be channeled to developing and emerging economies. We further show that in such a setting, export rebates are of minor importance for efficiency and justice.     

Carbon tariffs for financing clean development

In order to address carbon leakage and preserve the competitiveness of domestic industries, some industrialized Annex I countries have proposed to implement carbon tariffs. These tariffs would be levied on energy-intensive imports from developing non-Annex I countries that have not agreed to binding emissions reductions. This action could have detrimental welfare impacts, especially on those developing countries, and may not lead to significant reductions in leakage. A recent proposal is to use the revenues generated from carbon tariffs to finance clean development in the relevant exporting non-Annex I countries. This proposal is evaluated using an energy-economic model of the global economy. The model is supplemented by marginal abatement cost curves and bottom-up information on abatement potentials in order to represent how clean development financing affects emissions reductions. The results indicate that carbon tariffs could raise US$3.5–24.5 billion (with a central value of $9.8 billion) for clean development financing. This could reduce the emissions of non-Annex I countries by 5–15% and still leave funds available for other purposes, such as adaptation. Furthermore, recycling the revenues generated from carbon tariffs back to the exporting country itself could alleviate some of the negative welfare impacts associated with them. However, a net negative impact especially on the welfare and gross domestic product of developing countries would remain.     

主要发达经济体从碳达峰到碳中和的路径及启示

随着气候变化影响加剧,全球气候治理进程加速,实现碳达峰已经成为全球气候行动的核心,各国也相继制定碳中和目标并开展行动。中国在第75届联合国大会一般性辩论上提出了碳达峰碳中和目标,部分已实现碳达峰的发达经济体也提出了各自的碳中和承诺。文中从“整体-阶段”及“焦点-公平”视角分析了欧盟和美国等主要发达经济体碳达峰的历程和特点,以及其碳中和目标和规划。研究发现,发达经济体在碳达峰过程中普遍经历了较长的爬坡期（58~136年）和平台期（4~20年),在碳达峰时,发达经济体的能源结构以油气为主,油气占一次能源消费比重为57%~77%,其人均排放量、历史累计排放以及人均GDP也都处于较高水平,在碳达峰前后总体处于经济与碳排放脱钩状态。各发达经济体的碳中和路径均以能源转型为重点,采用了多元化的政策工具,并且注重低碳和负碳技术的革新。根据发达经济体的政策展望,在实现碳中和时,均难以将绝对排放量降为零,都需要通过碳移除手段进行抵消。通过对比分析,发现中国的碳达峰和碳中和目标是具有雄心的气候承诺,相较其他发达经济体需要付出更大努力。建议运用全面综合的政策工具支撑碳中和目标的有效落实,加快中国的气候立法,在兼顾公正转型的同时推动能源结构调整,注重可再生能源和能效方面的新技术开发应用。     

中国交通行业实施环境经济政策的协同控制效应研究

目前,交通行业已成为中国局地大气污染物和温室气体的重要排放来源之一,而且随着交通运输规模的不断扩大,与工业和生活排放相比,交通排放贡献占比呈相对增加趋势。文中构建了“CGE-CIMS联合模型”,对中国交通行业实施环境经济政策的局地大气污染物和CO₂协同控制效应进行量化评估。结果显示,与BAU情景相比,环境税、碳税、成品油消费税以及政策组合情景均促进了交通行业的电力消费替代汽油、柴油等石油制品,即使考虑政策实施后电力消费增加导致的间接排放,各情景下综合大气污染物协同减排量（ICER）仍为正值,即各项环境经济政策均具有较好的协同控制局地大气污染物和CO₂的效果。本文最后提出了包括聚焦高排放交通工具,以补贴低碳交通方式配合绿色税制改革,以及电力行业低碳发展等交通行业实施环境经济政策的配套措施建议。     

Sectoral targets for developing countries: combining ‘common but differentiated re-sponsibilities’ with ‘meaningful participation’

Although a global cap-and-trade system is seen by many researchers as the most cost-efficient solution to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the governments of developing countries refuse to enter into such a system in the short term. Many scholars and stakeholders, including the European Commission, have thus proposed various types of commitments for developing countries that appear less stringent, such as sectoral approaches. A macroeconomic assessment of such a sectoral approach is provided for developing countries. Two policy scenarios in particular are assessed, in which developed countries continue with Kyoto-type absolute commitments, while developing countries adopt an emissions trading system limited to electricity generation and linked to developed countries' cap-and-trade systems. In the first scenario, CO₂ allowances are auctioned by the government, which distributes its revenues as a lump sum to households. In a second scenario, the auction revenues are used to reduce taxes on, or to give subsidies to, electricity generation. The quantitative analysis, conducted with a hybrid general equilibrium model, shows that such options provide almost as much emissions reduction as a global cap-and-trade system. Moreover, in the second sectoral scenario, GDP losses in developing countries are much lower than with a global cap-and-trade system, as is also the effect on the electricity price.     

Global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios through the lens of structural change

This paper analyses structural change in the economy as a key but largely unexplored aspect of global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios. Structural change can actually drive energy and land use as much as economic growth and influence mitigation opportunities and barriers. Conversely, stringent climate policy is bound to induce specific structural and socio-economic transformations that are still insufficiently understood. We introduce Multi-Sectoral macroeconomic Integrated Assessment Models as tools to capture the key drivers of structural change and we conduct a multi-model study to assess main structural effects – changes of the sectoral composition and intensity of trade of global and regional economies – in a baseline and 2°C policy scenario by 2050. First, the range of baseline projections across models, for which we identify the main drivers, illustrates the uncertainty on future economic pathways – in emerging economies especially – and inform on plausible alternative futures with implications for energy use and emissions. Second, in all models, climate policy in the 2°C scenario imposes only a second-order impact on the economic structure at the macro-sectoral level – agriculture, manufacturing and services - compared to changes modelled in the baseline. However, this hides more radical changes for individual industries – within the energy sector especially. The study, which adopts a top-down framing of global structural change, represents a starting point to kick-start a conversation and propose a new research agenda seeking to improve understanding of the structural change effects in socio-economic and mitigation scenarios, and better inform policy assessments.     

Meeting Report

Top-down economic approaches theoretically show that placing a price on carbon can reduce emissions. Responses by firms to these policies, however, are less well understood and are critical for understanding the effectiveness of price-based carbon policy. This article provides an analysis of firm-level responses to the carbon tax in British Columbia (BC) through empirical research of grey literature, industry participation, and interviews with executives of major emitting firms in BC. The article highlights the empirical responses to the tax by firms, who experience difficulty in making low-carbon changes in response to fluctuating commodity prices, the low certainty of climate policy over temporal and spatial scales, and the political economy of implementing regional climate policy. It also highlights the importance of understanding firm-level responses as a complementary approach to macro-economic policy making on carbon pricing. The article shows the importance of engaging decision makers in corporations to understand how carbon is governed in light of emerging climate policy.

Policy relevance

This article is relevant to policy makers implementing carbon-pricing initiatives by illustrating the need to complement macroeconomic models with firm-level response analysis. It also demonstrates the key concerns of executives in a resource extractive economy and the ability of a carbon price, and the need for complementary technology funds and policy, to affect change in industrial emissions.