Carbon pricing, including carbon taxes and emissions trading, has been adopted by different kinds of polities worldwide. Yet, beyond the increasing adoption over time, little is known about what polities – countries as well as sub- and supranational entities – adopt carbon pricing and why. This paper explores patterns of adoption (both implemented policies and those scheduled to be) through cluster analysis, with the purpose of investigating factors that could explain polities’ decisions to adopt carbon pricing. The study contributes empirically by studying carbon taxes and emissions trading together and by ordering the polities adopting carbon pricing into clusters. It also contributes theoretically, by exploring constellations of variables that drive the adoption of carbon pricing within individual clusters. We investigated 66 adopted policies of carbon pricing, which were divided into five clusters: early adopters, North-American subnational entities, Chinese pilot provinces, second-wave developed polities, and second-wave developing polities. The analysis indicates that the reasons for adopting carbon pricing have shifted over time. While international factors (climate commitments or influences from polities within the same region) are increasingly salient, domestic factors (including crises and income levels) were more important for the early adopters.
Key policy insights
Carbon pricing has become a global mainstream policy instrument.
Economic and fiscal crises provide windows of opportunity for promoting carbon pricing.
The international climate regime can support the adoption of carbon pricing through mitigation commitments and international financial and technical assistance.
Learning between polities from the same region is a useful tool for promoting carbon pricing.
Carbon intensive economies tend to prefer emissions trading over carbon taxes.
This paper employs a computable general equilibrium model (CGE) to analyse how a carbon tax and/or a national Emissions Trading System (ETS) would affect macroeconomic parameters in Turkey. The modelling work is based on three main policy options for the government by 2030, in the context of Turkey’s mitigation target under its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), that is, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by up to 21% from its Business as Usual (BAU) scenario in 2030: (i) improving the productivity of renewable energy by 1% per annum, a target already included in the INDC, (ii) introducing a new flat rate tax of 15% per ton of CO2 (of a reference carbon price in world markets) imposed on emissions originating from carbon-intensive sectors, and (iii) introducing a new ETS with caps on emission permits. Our base path scenario projects that GHG emissions in 2030 will be much lower than Turkey’s BAU trajectory of growth from 430 Mt CO2-eq in 2013 to 1.175 Mt CO2-eq by 2030, implying that the government’s commitment is largely redundant. On the other hand, if the official target is assumed to be only a simple reduction percentage in 2030 (by 21%), but based on our more realistic base path, the government’s current renewable energy plans will not be sufficient to reach it.
Turkey’s official INDC is based on over-optimistic assumptions of GDP growth and a highly carbon-intensive development pathway;
A carbon tax and/or an ETS would be required to reach the 21% reduction target over a realistic base path scenario for 2030;
The policy options considered in this paper have some effects on major sectors’ shares in total value-added. Yet the reduction in the shares of agriculture, industry, and transportation does not go beyond 1%, while the service sector seems to benefit from most of the policy options;
Overall employment would be affected positively by the renewable energy target, carbon tax, and ETS through the creation of new jobs;
Unemployment rates are lower, economic growth is stronger, and households become better off to a larger extent under an ETS than carbon taxation.