Global carbon pricing and the “Common But Differentiated Responsibilities”: the case of China

This paper analyzes whether using carbon pricing as the major mitigation policy instrument is compatible with the implementation of the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle in a global climate agreement. We focus more specifically on China, a key player in climate negotiations. This...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International environmental agreements : politics, law and economics law and economics, 2016-10, Vol.16 (5), p.671-689
Main Authors: Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem, Waisman, Henri
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agreements
Architecture
Carbon
Climate
Climate change
Climate policy
Developing countries
Earth and Environmental Science
Economic impact
Economic models
Emissions
Emissions control
Emissions trading
Environment
Environmental Economics
Environmental Law/Policy/Ecojustice
Environmental Management
Environmental policy
Environmental Sciences
Global climate
Implementation
Income distribution
International agreements
International trade
LDCs
Nature Conservation
Negotiations
Original Paper
Political Science
Prices
Pricing
Quotas
Regional development
Regions
Statistical analysis
Time periods
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper analyzes whether using carbon pricing as the major mitigation policy instrument is compatible with the implementation of the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle in a global climate agreement. We focus more specifically on China, a key player in climate negotiations. This is done by adopting the Imaclim-R model to assess the economic effect of carbon pricing on the Chinese economy in different climate architectures which, despite aiming at the same stabilization target, differ in terms of the temporal profile of emission reductions and the regional distribution of efforts (different quota allocation schemes). Model outcomes prove that neither temporal nor regional flexibilities provides a satisfactory answer since the Chinese economy remains significantly hurt at certain time periods. This suggests the recourse to complementary measures to carbon pricing in order to help smoothing the necessary shift toward a low-carbon society. This means in particular that, to build a climate policy architecture that could be compatible with the “common but differentiated responsibility” principle, climate negotiations must go beyond global top-down systems relying on cap-and-trade to include bottom-up measures likely to complement the carbon price and make carbon mitigation acceptable in countries like China.
ISSN:1567-9764
1573-1553
DOI:10.1007/s10784-015-9289-2