Abstract
Issues of equity and fairness have been much debated in the context of the international agreements on the reduction of greenhouse gases, especially before, during and after the negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol. This relates to the fact that a high proportion of the current C02 emissions are produced by developed countries, and to the fact that the costs of abatement, technology change and control are often too high to be afforded by Third World nations. By consequence, emissions limits have been set for only a limited number of industrialized countries.
This work has been realized within the FEEM working group on Integrated Assessment Modelling. Members of this group, including Paolo Buonanno, Carlo Carraro, Efrem Castelnuovo, Marzio Galeotti, Michèle Moretto and the authors, have contributed with useful comments and suggestions. Remaining errors, however, are the sole responsibility of the authors of the paper. We are grateful to Z. Yang who kindly provided the RICE model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Administration Economic Analysis (1998). The Kyoto Protocol and the President’s policies to address climate change. Published report.
Atkinson, A.B. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory. 2:244–63.
Baumol, W.J. and Oates, W.E. (1975). The theory of environmental policy: externalities, public outlays and the quality of life. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Chander, P., Tulkens, H., van Ypersele, J.P. and Willems, S. (1999). The Kyoto Protocol: an economic and game theoretic interpretation. CLIMNEG working paper, n. 12, CORE. Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium.
Helm, C. (1999). Axiomatic fairness criteria and the allocation of climate protection burdens. Paper presented at the EFIEA workshop on Integrated climate policies in the European environment, costs and opportunities. Milan, March 1999.
Morita, T., Matsuoka, Y., Jiang, K., et al (1998). Al marker scenario. Mimeo. Nordhaus, W.D. and Boyer, J.G. (1999). Requiem for Kyoto: an economic analysis of the Kyoto Protocol. Mimeo.
Nordhaus, W.D. and Yang, Z. (1996). A regional dynamic general equilibrium model of alternative climate change strategies. The American Economic Review. 86(4):741–65.
Rose, A. and Stevens, B. (1999). A dynamic analysis of fairness in global warming policy: Kyoto, Buenos Aires, and beyond Paper presented at the EFIEA workshop on Integrated climate policies in the European environment, costs and opportunities. Milan, March 1999.
Schmalensee, R., Joskow, P.L., Ellerman, A.D., Montero, J.P. and Bailey, E.M. (1998). An interim evaluation of sulfur dioxide emission trading. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 12(3):53–68.
Stavins, R.N. (1998). What can we learn from the grand policy experiment? Lessons from S02 allowance trading. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 12(3):69–88.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bosello, F., Roson, R. (2000). Distributional Consequences of Alternative Emissions Trading Schemes. In: Carraro, C. (eds) Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) Series on Economics, Energy and Environment, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9484-4_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9484-4_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5439-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-9484-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive