期刊文献+

以环境税治理雾霾的减排效果及减排成本——基于动态多区域CGE模型 被引量:12

Emission Reduction Effect and Emission Reduction Cost of Haze by Environmental Tax--A Dynamic Multi-region CGE Analysis
下载PDF
导出
摘要 建立多区域动态CGE模型,将中国划分为京津冀、环京津冀、中部、长三角、东北、西北、西南、珠三角和南部九个地区,并按雾霾严重程度划分为高污染地区和低污染地区两组。设定三种不同的模拟情景,从空气质量、硫税税率、减排成本、各行业总产出等多个维度评价政策影响。模拟结果显示:(1)在基准情景中,直至2030年九个区域的空气质量均无法达到国家一级标准,其中四个地区甚至不能达到二级标准。(2)当前环保法规定的硫税税率偏低,远低于减排成本,无法根本扭转雾霾问题。(3)减排的平均成本、边际成本与当地经济对能源开采的依赖程度高度正相关,东北、西北等富煤地区的减排成本最高,2030年边际减排成本可达50~70万元/吨。相对而言,珠三角和南部地区由于能源生产和能源消费均较低,减排成本处于九个区域的最低水平,2030年边际减排成本仅为30~45万元/吨。(4)硫税等环保税政策导致煤炭行业严重萎缩,在最严厉的模拟情景(B03)中,2030年煤炭总产出相对于基准情景下降70%以上。(5)在各区域实施不同政策的情景(B01和B02)中,高污染产业会由紧约束地区转向宽约束、无约束地区,即存在所谓的“监管泄露”现象。 A multi-region dynamic CGE model was established,which divides China into nine regions:Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei,Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Rim Region,Central Region,Yangtze River Delta,Northeast,Northwest,Southwest,Pearl River Delta and Southern China.According to the severity of haze,China is divided into two groups:high-polluted areas and low-polluted areas.This paper set up three different simulation scenarios,and evaluated the policy impact from different perspectives:air quality,sulfur tax rate,emission reduction costs,total output of various industries and other dimensions.The simulation results are as follows.(1)In the baseline scenario,the air quality of nine regions will not meet the national first-level standard until 2030,and four of them will not even meet the second-level standard.(2)The sulfur tax rate stipulated by the current environmental protection law is far lower than the cost of emission reduction,which will not fundamentally reverse the haze problem.(3)The average cost and marginal cost of emission reduction are highly positively correlated with local economy’s dependence on energy exploitation.Coal-rich areas such as Northeast and Northwest have the highest cost of emission reduction,with the marginal cost of emission reduction reaching 500000~700000 Yuan/ton by 2030.Due to the low energy production and consumption,the cost of emission reduction in the Pearl River Delta and the southern region is the lowest among the nine regions,and the marginal cost of emission reduction in 2030 is only 300000~450000 Yuan/ton.(4)Sulphur tax and other environmental protection tax policies have led to a serious shrinkage of the coal industry.In the most severe simulation scenario(B03),total coal output will decline by more than 70%in 2030,compared with the benchmark scenario.(5)In the scenarios of implementing different policies in different regions(B01 and B02),high-polluting industries will change from tight-bound areas to wide-bound and unrestricted areas,that is to say,there exists the phenomenon of so-called“regulatory leakage”.
作者 张文静 马喜立 ZHANG Wenjing;MA Xili(Graduate School,University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 102488,China;Strategic Development Department,Huaxia Bank,Beijing 100005,China)
出处 《北京理工大学学报(社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2020年第3期36-47,共12页 Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology:Social Sciences Edition
基金 国家社科基金青年项目(19CJY025) 中国社会科学院大学(研究生院)研究生科研创新支持计划项目(2020-KY-095) 北京市博士后工作经费资助项目(2018-ZZ-084)。
关键词 动态多区域CGE模型 污染治理 减排成本 雾霾 环境税 dynamic multi-region CGE model pollution control reduction cost smog environmental tax
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献24

  • 1王灿,陈吉宁,邹骥.基于CGE模型的CO_2减排对中国经济的影响[J].清华大学学报(自然科学版),2005,45(12):1621-1624. 被引量:191
  • 2J Elliott, D Fullerton. Can a unilateral carbon tax reduce emissions elsewhere? [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2014 ( I) : 6 -21.
  • 3C Bohringer, H Welsch. Contraction and convergence of carbon emissions: an intertemporal multi-region CGE analysis [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 2004 ( I) :21 -39.
  • 4T H Edwards, J P Hutton. Allocation of carbon permits within a country: a general equilibrium analysis of the United Kingdom[J]. Energy Economies,2001(4) :371 -386.
  • 5R Loisel. Environmental climate instruments in Romania: a comparative approach using dynamic CGE modeling [J]. Energy Policy, 2009 ( 6) : 2190 - 2204.
  • 6G Allan, P Lecca , P McGregor, et al. The economic and environmental impact of a carbon tax for Scotland: A computable general equilibrium analysis [J]. Ecological Economics, 2014: 40 -50.
  • 7Y Xu, T Masui. Local air pollutant emission reduction and ancillary carbon benefits of S02 control policies: Application of AIM/CGE model 10 China [J]. European Journal of Operational Research ,2009 (1):315-325.
  • 8B Decaluwe , A Lemelin, H Maisonnave, et al. PEP-I-I (Single Country, Recursive Dynamic Version) [J/OL J. http://www . pepnet. orglpep-I-I-single-country-recursive-dynamic-version, 2013- 01-01.
  • 9H J Chang, G L Cho, Y D Kim. The economic impact of strengthening fuel quality regulation-reducing sulfur content in diesel fuel[J]. Energy Policy,2006(16) :2572 -2585.
  • 10王金南,严刚,姜克隽,刘兰翠,杨金田,葛察忠.应对气候变化的中国碳税政策研究[J].中国环境科学,2009,29(1):101-105. 被引量:134

共引文献11

同被引文献220

引证文献12

二级引证文献108

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部