中国生产控制型产业减排的居民福利和区域影响

基于SAM均衡建模方法,建立面向居民福利研究的中国动态多区域社会公平CGE政策模拟模型,对比分析自然情景、生产控制型减排政策情景和最优增长情景下的区域和居民福利变化。研究发现减排政策存在明显的增长率区域分异,这将破坏在自然增长下存在的区域收敛力,导致中国区域之间的差距再度被拉大。面向减排的投资控制政策短期对于居民收入的不利影响较小,但长期影响不容忽视,需要进行居民收入保护。由于城镇退休居民和农村劳动居民已经具备针对性的养老保障政策和“三农政策”保护收入增长,其总体福利受减排政策的冲击较小,因此缺乏相应政策支持的城镇劳动居民应该是收入保护的优先考虑群体。模拟显示减排政策更有利于代际和城乡人均收入差距的缩小,但考虑到减排带来的绝对收入水平下降,不能过于乐观估计这种差距缩小效应。

Impact of Carbon Abatement Policies in Manufacturing Process Control on Household Welfare and Regional Economic Development

The changes of household welfare in terms of income and consumption have an important and far-reaching impact on the general public’s attitudes towards CO₂ emissions reduction policy, which will fundamentally determine whether the policy can be implemented within the context of global climate change. Given the situation, based on the method of social accounting matrix (SAM) equilibrium, this article presents a self-developed inter-province multi-regional dynamic computable general equilibrium(CGE) model, then analyzes and simulates the impacts of different carbon abatement policies on household welfare in terms of income and consumption and regional economic development in China. The results show that remarkable differences in regional GDP growth rate affected by emissions mitigation policies exist in China, and regional economic convergence would be obviously damaged under natural growth scenario. More seriously, however, the gap between China’s regional economies is being widened again. In addition, although household income is less affected by the carbon abatement policy of manufacturing process control at the early stage of the simulation, the long-term impact of the policy should not be ignored. Thus, active initiatives are being taken to increase income of the residents, which should be paid more attention to. Furthermore, because the Chinese government has provided some targeted policies such as the Old-Age security policy and the Three-Agriculture policy (namely, agriculture, rural areas and farmers) to increase income of the retired urban residents and rural residents respectively, their welfare in terms of income have suffered less from the impact of CO₂ emissions reduction policy. While income growth for urban labor is lack of the related support policy from the government, so next the key thing we are focused on is priority must be given to provide more income for them. Meanwhile according to the simulation results, considering the adverse impact of CO₂ emissions reduction policy on absolute number of income growth for the household, though the policy is more conducive to reduce the gap between the rural and urban residents' income and between generations, the extent of the reduction is too early to be overly optimistic.