TY - JOUR
T1 - Clean energy policy : taxing carbon and the illusion of the equity objective
AU - Perry, Neil
AU - Rosewarne, Stuart
AU - White, Graham
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - The Australian government has passed legislation, the Clean Energy Future Policy, establishing a carbon-emission pricing scheme. While the scheme is represented as the most efficient and cost effective means of reducing emissions, the government has also committed to ensuring equity in burden sharing, particularly through the use of household compensation methods and by minimising the disadvantages faced by energy-intensive trade-exposed industries thereby committing to these industries' continued developments. Treasury modelling used to determine the required level of household compensation has remained relatively uncontested. We question the conclusion of equity in burden sharing on the basis of this modelling. The modelling reflects fairly standard conventional economic theory in terms of market structures, the determination of prices and outputs, and the characterisation of factor markets. The behavioural assumptions overstate the consumer and producer substitution possibilities, failing to consider the possibility of technical reswitching, and ignore the impact that oligopolistic market structures would have on price increases and infrastructure investment. The full ramifications of compensation for overall government expenditure and therefore the capacity of the government to continue to fund a range of elements of the social wage, the potential for unemployment and transitioning workers to less carbon-intensive industries, are also overlooked.
AB - The Australian government has passed legislation, the Clean Energy Future Policy, establishing a carbon-emission pricing scheme. While the scheme is represented as the most efficient and cost effective means of reducing emissions, the government has also committed to ensuring equity in burden sharing, particularly through the use of household compensation methods and by minimising the disadvantages faced by energy-intensive trade-exposed industries thereby committing to these industries' continued developments. Treasury modelling used to determine the required level of household compensation has remained relatively uncontested. We question the conclusion of equity in burden sharing on the basis of this modelling. The modelling reflects fairly standard conventional economic theory in terms of market structures, the determination of prices and outputs, and the characterisation of factor markets. The behavioural assumptions overstate the consumer and producer substitution possibilities, failing to consider the possibility of technical reswitching, and ignore the impact that oligopolistic market structures would have on price increases and infrastructure investment. The full ramifications of compensation for overall government expenditure and therefore the capacity of the government to continue to fund a range of elements of the social wage, the potential for unemployment and transitioning workers to less carbon-intensive industries, are also overlooked.
KW - carbon pricing
KW - carbon tax
KW - climatic changes
KW - equity
UR - http://handle.uws.edu.au:8081/1959.7/528416
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.018
DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.02.018
M3 - Article
SN - 0921-8009
VL - 90
SP - 104
EP - 113
JO - Ecological Economics
JF - Ecological Economics
ER -