Climate Policy

  • Christoph Böhringer
  • Andreas Löschel
Part of the ZEW Economic Studies book series (ZEW, volume 26)


Despite the withdrawal of the USA under President Bush in March 2001, the Kyoto Protocol marks a milestone in climate policy history. For the first time, industrialised countries as listed in Annex B of the Protocol have agreed on quantified emissions limitations and reduction objectives. The negotiations around the Protocol have been dominated by two fundamental issues whose reconciliation is crucial for any substantial international agreement on climate protection: efficiency in terms of overall abatement costs, and equity in terms of a ‘fair’ distribution of these costs across countries. These issues are relevant in other fields of international environmental policy as well, but their importance in the greenhouse context is unique, given the potential magnitude of abatement costs at stake.


Climate Policy Kyoto Protocol Abatement Cost Carbon Leakage Emission Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, D. (1999), Technical Progress and Pollution Abatement: An Economic Review of Selected Technologies and Practices, Working Paper, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
  2. Armington, P.A. (1969), A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production, IMF Staff Papers 16(1), 159–178.Google Scholar
  3. Barker, T. (1998), The Effects on Competitiveness of Coordinated Versus Unilateral Fiscal Policies Reducing GHG Emissions in the EU: An Assessment of a 10% Reduction by 2010 Using the E3ME Model, Energy Policy 26(14), 1083–1098.Google Scholar
  4. Barker, T. (1999), Achieving a 10% Cut in Europe’s CO2 Emissions Using Additional Excise Duties: Coordinated, Uncoordinated and Unilateral Action Using the Econometric Model E3ME, Economic Systems Research 11(4), 401–421.Google Scholar
  5. Barker, T. and N. Johnstone (1998), International Competitiveness and Carbon Taxation, in: Barker, T. and J. Köhler (Eds.), International Competitiveness and Environmental Policies, Cheltenham, 71–127.Google Scholar
  6. Baron, R., M. Bosi, A. Lanza, and J. Pershing (1999), A Preliminary Analysis of the EU Proposals on the Kyoto Mechanisms, Energy and Environment Division, International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
  7. Bernstein, P., D. Montgomery, and T.F. Rutherford (1999), Global Impacts of the Kyoto Agreement: Results from the MS-MRT Model, Resource and Energy Economics 21(3-4), 375–413.Google Scholar
  8. Böhm, P. and B. Larsen (1994), Fairness in a Tradable Permit Treaty for Carbon Emissions Reductions in Europe and the Former Soviet Union, Environmental and Resource Economics 4, 219–239.Google Scholar
  9. Böhringer, C. (1998a), Unilateral Taxation of International Environmental Externalities and Sectoral Exemptions, in: Fossati, A. and J. Hutton (Eds.), Policy Simulations in the European Union, London, 140–155.Google Scholar
  10. Böhringer, C. (1998b), The Synthesis of Bottom-Up and Top-Down in Energy Policy Modeling, Energy Economics 20(3), 233–248.Google Scholar
  11. Böhringer, C. (1999), Die Kosten von Klimaschutz: Eine Interpretationshilfe für die mit quantitativen Wirtschaftsmodellen ermittelten Kostenschätzungen, Journal of Environmental Law and Policy 22(3), 369–384.Google Scholar
  12. Böhringer, C, M. Ferris, and T.F. Rutherford (1998), Alternative CO2 Abatement Strategies for the European Union, in: Braden, J. and S. Proost (Eds.), Climate Change, Transport and Environmental Policy, Cheltenham, 16–47.Google Scholar
  13. Böhringer, C, G.W. Harrison, and T.F. Rutherford (2003), Sharing the Burden of Carbon Abatement in the European Union, in: Böhringer, C. and A. Löschel (Eds.), Empirical Modeling of the Economy and the Environment, ZEW Economic Studies, Vol. 20, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  14. Böhringer, C. and C. Helm (2001), Fair Division with General Equilibrium Effects and International Climate Politics, ZEW Discussion Paper 01-67, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  15. Böhringer, C, J. Jensen, and T.F. Rutherford (2000), Energy Market Projections and Differentiated Carbon Abatement in the European Union, in: Carraro, C. (Ed.), Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy, Dordrecht, 199–220.Google Scholar
  16. Böhringer, C, A. Ruocco, and W. Wiegard (2001a), Energiesteuem und Beschäftigung: Ein Simulationsmodell zum Selberrechnen, WISU 30(1), 117–123.Google Scholar
  17. Böhringer, C, A. Ruocco, and W. Wiegard (2001b), Energiesteuem und Beschäftigung: Einige Simulationsergebnisse, WISU 30(4), 596–612.Google Scholar
  18. Böhringer, C. and T.F. Rutherford (forthcoming), Carbon Abatement and International Spillovers, Environmental and Resource Economics.Google Scholar
  19. Böhringer, C. and T.F. Rutherford (2001), World Economic Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol, in: Welfens, P.J.J. (Ed.), Internalization of the Economy and Environmental Policy Options, Berlin, 161–180.Google Scholar
  20. Böhringer, C, T.F. Rutherford, and A. Voss (1998), Global CO2 Emissions and Unilateral Action: Policy Implications of Induced Trade Effects, Internationaljournal of Global Energy Issues 18–22.Google Scholar
  21. Böhringer C. and C. Vogt (2001), Internationaler Klimaschutz: nicht mehr als symbolische Politik?, Aussenwirtschaft 56(II), 139–155.Google Scholar
  22. Böhringer, C. and H. Welsch (1999), C&C-Contraction and Convergence of Carbon Emissions: The Economic Implications of Permit Trading, ZEW Discussion Paper 99–113, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  23. Bovenberg, A.L. (1999), Green Tax Reforms and the Double Dividend: An Updated Reader’s Guide, International Tax and Public Finance 6, 421–443.Google Scholar
  24. Bovenberg, A.L. and R.A. de Mooij (1994), Environmental Levies and Distortionary Taxation, American Economic Review 84(4), 1085–1089.Google Scholar
  25. Buonanno, P., C. Carraro, and M. Galeotti (2000), Endogenous Induced Technical Change, Working paper, Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei.Google Scholar
  26. Burniaux, J.-M. and J.O. Martins (2000), Carbon Emission Leakages: A General Equilibrium View, Working Paper 242, Organisation for Cooperation and Development (OECD), Economics Department.Google Scholar
  27. Capros, P., T. Georgakopoulos, D. van Regemorter, S. Proost, T.F.N. Schmidt, and K. Conrad (1997), European Union: The GEM-E3 General Equilibrium Model, Economic and Financial Modelling, Special Double Issue 4(2/3).Google Scholar
  28. Dean, A. and P. Hoeller (1992), Costs of Reducing CO2 Emissions: Evidence from Six Global Models, OECD Economic Studies 19 (Winter).Google Scholar
  29. DOE (Department of Energy) (1998), Annual Energy Outlook, Energy Information Administration.Google Scholar
  30. Edmonds, J., M. Wise, and D. Bams (1995), Carbon Coalitions: The Cost and Effectiveness of Energy Agreements to Alter Trajectories of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Emissions, Energy Policy 23, 309–335.Google Scholar
  31. Ekins, P. and S. Speck (1998), The Impacts of Environmental Policy on Competitiveness: Theory and Evidence, in: Barker, T. and J. Köhler (Eds.), International Competitiveness and Environmental Policies, Cheltenham, 33–70.Google Scholar
  32. EMF-16 Working Group (1999), Economic and Energy System Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol: Results from the Energy Modeling Forum Study, Stanford Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  33. Goulder, L.H. (1995a), Effects of Carbon Taxes in an Economy with Prior Tax Distortions: An Intertemporal General Equilibrium Analysis, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29, 271–297.Google Scholar
  34. Goulder, L.H. (1995b), Environmental Taxation and the Double Dividend: A Reader’s Guide, International Tax and Public Finance 2, 157–183.Google Scholar
  35. Goulder, L.H. and K. Mathai (2000), Optimal CO2 Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
  36. Goulder, L.H. and S. Schneider (1999), Induced Technological Change, Crowding out, and the Attractiveness of CO2 Emissions Abatement, Resource and Environmental Economics 21(3-4), 211–253.Google Scholar
  37. Grubb, M. (1997), Technologies, Energy Systems, and the Timing of CO2 Abatement: An Overview of Economic Issues, Energy Policy 25, 159–172.Google Scholar
  38. Grubb, M. (2000), Economic Dimensions of Technological and Global Responses to the Kyoto Protocol, Journal of Economic Studies 27(1/2), 111–125.Google Scholar
  39. Grubb, M., J. Edmonds, P. ten Brink, and M. Morrison (1993), The Costs of Limiting Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions: A Survey and Analysis, Annual Review of Energy and Environment 18, 397–478.Google Scholar
  40. Hourcade, J.-C. (1993), Modelling Long-Run Scenarios: Methodology Lessons from a Prospective Study on a Low CO2 Intensive Country, Energy Policy 21(3), 309–311.Google Scholar
  41. Hourcade, J.-C. and J. Robinson (1996), Mitigating Factors: Assessing the Cost of Reducing GHG Emissions, Energy Policy 24(10/11), 863–873.Google Scholar
  42. IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) (1996), Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  43. IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) (2001), Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, Contribution of Working Group HI to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  44. Jaffe, B. and R.N. Stavins (1991), The Energy-Efficiency Gap: What Does It Mean?, Energy Policy 22(10), 804–810.Google Scholar
  45. Jorgenson, D.W. and P.J. Wilcoxen (1993), Reducing U.S. Carbon Emissions: An Econometric General Equilibrium Assessment, Resource and Energy Economics 15, 7–25.Google Scholar
  46. Kram, J. (1998), The Costs of Greenhouse Gas Abatement, in: Nordhaus, W. (Ed.), Economics and Policy issues in Climate Change, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 167–189.Google Scholar
  47. Krause, F., J. Koomey, and D. Olivier (1999), Cutting Carbon Emissions While Saving Money: Low Risk Strategies for the European Union: Executive Summary, in: F. Krause et al. (Eds.), Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Vol. II, Part 2, El Cerrito, USA.Google Scholar
  48. Kverndokk, S. (1995), Tradable CO2 Permits: Initial Distribution as a Justice Problem, Environmental Values 4(2), 129–148.Google Scholar
  49. Kverndokk, S., K.E. Rosendahl, and T.F. Rutherford (2000), Climate Policies and Induced Technological Change, Which to Choose: The Carrot or the Stick?, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  50. Lange, A. and C. Vogt (2001), Cooperation in International Environmental Negotiations Due to a Preference for Equity, ZEW Discussion Paper 01-14, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  51. Löschel, A. (2001), Technological Change in Economic Models of Environmental Policy: A Survey, ZEW Discussion Paper 01-62, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  52. MacCracken, C.N., J.A. Edmonds, S.H. Kim, and R.D. Sands (1999), The Economics of the Kyoto Protocol, in: Weyant, J. (Ed.), The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation, The Energy Journal Special Issue.Google Scholar
  53. Maddison, D. (1995), A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Slowing Climate Change, Energy Policy 23(4/5), 337–346.Google Scholar
  54. Manne, A.S. and J.O. Martins (1994), Comparisons of Model Structure and Policy Scenarios: GREEN and 12RT, in: OECD (Ed.), Policy Response to the Threat of Global Warming, Paris.Google Scholar
  55. Manne, A.S. and R.G. Richels (1990), The Costs of Reducing CO2 Emission: A Further Sensitivity Analysis, Energy Journal 11(4), 69–78.Google Scholar
  56. Manne, A.S. and R.G. Richels (1992), Buying Greenhouse Insurance: The Economic Costs of CO 2 Emission Limits, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  57. Manne, A.S. and R.G. Richels (1995), The Greenhouse Debate: Economic Efficiency Burden Sharing and Hedging Strategies, Energy Journal 16(4), 1–37.Google Scholar
  58. McKibbin, W., M. Ross, R. Shackleton, and P. Wilcoxen (1999), Emissions Trading, Capital Flows and the Kyoto Protocol, The Energy Journal Special Issue, 287–333.Google Scholar
  59. Mishan, E.J. (1975), Cost-Benefit Analysis, London.Google Scholar
  60. Montgomery, D.W. and P. Bernstein (2000), Insights on the Kyoto Protocol: Impact on Trade Patterns and Economic Growth in 25 Countries, Charles River Associates.Google Scholar
  61. Morrisette, P. and A. Plantinga (1991), The Global Warming Issue: Viewpoints of Different Countries, Resources 103, 2–6.Google Scholar
  62. Oliveira-Martins, J., J.-M. Burniaux, and J.P. Martin (1992), Trade and the Effectiveness of Unilateral CO2 Abatement Policies: Evidence from GREEN, OECD Economic Studies 19, 123–140.Google Scholar
  63. Paltsev, S.V. (2000a), The Kyoto Agreement: Regional and Sectoral Contributions to the Carbon Leakage, Working Paper 00-5, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  64. Paltsev, S.V. (2000b), The Kyoto Protocol: ‘Hot air’ for Russia?, Working Paper 00-9, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  65. Parry, I.W.H., R. Williams, and L.H. Goulder (1999), When Can Carbon Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 37(1), 52–84.Google Scholar
  66. Pearce, D. (1998), Cost-Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policy, Oxford Review of Economic Studies 14(4), 84–100.Google Scholar
  67. Pezzey, J. (1992), Analysis of Unilateral CO2 Control in the European Community and OECD, The Energy Journal 13, 159–171.Google Scholar
  68. Reilly, J., R. Prinn, J. Harnisch, J. Fitzmaurice, H. Jacoby, D. Kicklighter, J. Melillo, P. Stone, A. Sokolov, and C. Wang (1999), Multi-Gas Assessment of the Kyoto Protocol, Nature 401, 549–555.Google Scholar
  69. Richels, R., J. Edmonds, H. Gruenspecht, and T. Wigley (1996), The Berlin Mandate: The Design of Cost Effective Mitigation Strategies, Energy Modeling Forum 14, Working Paper.Google Scholar
  70. Richels, R. and P. Sturm (1996), The Cost of CO2 Emissions Reductions: Some Insights from Global Analyses, Energy Policy 24(10/11), 875–887.Google Scholar
  71. Rose, A. (1990), Reducing Conflict in Global Warming Policy: The Potential of Equity as a Unifying Principle, Energy Policy 18, 927–935.Google Scholar
  72. Rose, A. and B. Stevens (1998), A Dynamic Analysis of Fairness in Global Warming Policy: Kyoto, Buenos Aires, and Beyond, Journal of Applied Economics 1(2), 329–362.Google Scholar
  73. Rose, A., B. Stevens, J. Edmonds, and M. Wise (1998), International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy, Environmental and Resource Economics 12, 25–51.Google Scholar
  74. Rutherford, T.F. (1995a), Carbon Dioxide Emission Restrictions in the Global Economy: Leakage, Competitiveness and the Implications for Policy Design, American Council for Capital Formation, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  75. Rutherford, T.F. (1995b), Extensions of GAMS for Complementarity Problems Arising in Applied Economics, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 19, 1299–1324.Google Scholar
  76. Shoven, J.B. and J. Whalley (1984), Applied General Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey, Journal of Economic Literature 22, 1007–1051.Google Scholar
  77. Shoven, J.B. and J. Whalley (1992), Applying General Equilibrium, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  78. Stavins, R. (1999), The Costs of Carbon Sequestration: A Revealed-Preference Approach, American Economic Review 89(4), 994–1009.Google Scholar
  79. Tol, R.S.J. (1999), Spatial and Temporal Efficiency in Climate Policy: Applications of FUND, Environmental and Resource Economics 14(1), 33–49.Google Scholar
  80. Tulpulé, V., S. Brown, J. Lim, C. Polidano, H. Pant, and B. Fisher (1999), An Economic Assessment of the Kyoto Protocol Using the Global Trade and Environment Model, The Energy Journal Special Issue, 257–285.Google Scholar
  81. UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) (1997), Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, FCCC/CP/L.7/Add. 1, Kyoto.Google Scholar
  82. van der Mensbrugghe, D. (1998), A (Preliminary) Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol, Using the OECD GREEN Model, in: OECD (Ed.), Economic Modelling of Climate Change, Paris, 173–204.Google Scholar
  83. Weyant, J. (1998), The Costs of Carbon Emissions Reductions, in: W. Nordhaus (Ed.), Economics and Policy Issues in Climate Change, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., 191–214.Google Scholar
  84. Weyant, J. (Ed.) (1999), The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation, The Energy Journal Special Issue.Google Scholar
  85. Weyant, J. and T. Olavson (1999), Issues in Modeling Induced Technological Change in Energy, Environment, and Climate Policy, Journal of Environmental Management and Assessment 1, 67–85.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Böhringer
    • 1
  • Andreas Löschel
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for European Economic ResearchMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations