The Income Distribution Impacts of Deep Decarbonization Policy in East Asia

• Main Authors: Fu, Yu-Hsuan, 傅俞瑄
• Other Authors: Shaw, Dai-Gee
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2019
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/eg4vav

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 經濟學系 === 107 === Climate change is a public, global and intergenerational externality. The primary cause of climate change is greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities, especially CO2 emissions. Taiwan is also exposed by this externality. Therefore, it is necessary and instant to implement deep decarbonization policy. This paper applied E3ME model to study the impact of deep decarbonization policy on environment, energy structure and economy. First, we compare two policy instruments with economic incentive: carbon tax and feed-in tariffs. The result shows that the power generation of the renewable energy does not have much difference between these two policy instruments, which indicates that what economic incentive or how much is the economic incentive are not the main factors to induce the development of renewable energy. However, imposing carbon tax would reduce more CO2 emissions than feed-in tariffs. Second, we considered different ways of the revenues from carbon tax could be used: (1) for budget deficit or surplus (2) reducing value-added tax rate; (3) income tax rate; (4) labor tax rate; or (5) all three of them, and (6) increasing benefit payment or (7) lump-sum income payment, and the last is (8) reducing value-added tax rate and lump-sum income payment simultaneously. Last, we simulate the same policy implemented in Japan and Korea to compare the policy effect in East Asia. The result shows that imposing carbon tax at a higher price and the revenues used for reducing value-added tax rate and lump-sum income payment simultaneously in Taiwan is a better way of revenue recycling. It would have a positive effect on national economy and improve the income distribution. Among Taiwan, Japan and Korea these three countries, Taiwan would experience larger effects if imposing carbon tax. The better way of revenue recycling to have a positive effect on national economy is via reducing value-added tax rate, and increasing benefit payment or lump-sum income payment would improve income distribution in all three countries. However, reducing income tax rate, increasing benefit payment or lump-sum income payment have relatively smaller effect in Taiwan. Reducing labor tax rate has smaller effect in Japan. Also, the carbon tax is more regressive in Japan and Korea than in Taiwan. In conclusion, imposing carbon tax with proper revenue recycling could provide the possibility of achieving the objective of deep decarbonization.