Equity and Justice in Global Warming Policy

Kverndokk, Snorre; Rose, Adam

doi:10.1561/101.00000015

Cited by 48 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although many transboundary pollutants are of current concern, much of the theoretical economics literature on this topic focuses on climate change as the ultimate global environmental problem (and climate change mitigation as a global public good; Barret, 2005; Finus, 2008). This is also true for the literature on the role of equity preferences in IEAs (Kverndokk et al, 2014; Kverndokk & Rose, 2008). Theoretical contributions on the formation and stability of coalitions for IEAs show that preferences for equal burden sharing between participating countries increase both the size and stability of these coalitions (Lange, 2006; Lange & Vogt, 2003; Vogt, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements

Bӧrger

Hanley

Johnston

et al. 2023

American J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines empirically the importance of equity preferences for the formation of international environmental agreements (IEA) for transboundary pollution control. Although it has been shown theoretically that the existence of equity preferences among countries considering an IEA increases the chances for formation and stability of a coalition, empirical assessments of such preferences have been limited to climate change mitigation and single‐country studies. We consider the case of marine plastic pollution, of which a large share consists of food and beverage containers, representing a transboundary pollution control problem of increasing policy concern, with properties that lead to distinct considerations for equity and the sharing of abatement costs. We employ a coordinated choice experiment in the United Kingdom and United States to assess preferences for abatement‐cost allocations in a marine plastics IEA. Pairs of cooperating countries and the relative allocation of abatement costs are varied experimentally. Results show systematic aversion to both advantageous and disadvantageous inequality with respect to abatement costs but also that the relative strength of advantageous and disadvantageous inequality aversion differs across countries. Across both countries, there is evidence that left‐leaning voters generally favor more equal international sharing of abatement costs. Differences of these results from the case of greenhouse gas emission reduction, and implications for current efforts to establish a legally binding global treaty on marine plastic pollution, are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements

Bӧrger

Hanley

Johnston

et al. 2023

American J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main research methods were a literature review and analyses. The main sources are [5][6][7][8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Analysis Of Energy Justice Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The policy and economic instruments used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will impose different burdens on different people [9]. Intragenerational equity is primarily about how we should distribute the burdens within particular generations, either within the generation living today or within future generations [10]. On the other hand, intergeneration equity is about the distribution of burdens between the current generation and future generations, as the costs of mitigation are borne by the current generation, while future generations benefit from it [11].…”

Section: Identification Of the Main Goals Of Energy Justice Theory In The Changing Energy Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Renewable Energy Prosumers in Implementing Energy Justice Theory

Milčiuvienė

Kiršienė

Doheijo³

et al. 2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the use of photovoltaic-based distributed electricity generation has played a key role in achieving climate and energy policy goals. The energy market is changing rapidly from centralized generation towards unbundling generation, transmission, distribution, and supply activities. As energy consumers also become producers, a new energy market player—the prosumer—is emerging. The role of the prosumer as a market player can be analyzed in terms of implemented technological solutions, economic assessment, environmental impact, and legal regulation requirements. The aim of this article is to investigate the importance and compatibility of energy prosumers with energy justice theory in the context of European Union (EU) law. The authors concluded first that an energy prosumer will help to meet energy justice goals only if government ensures support for generation facilities for low-income consumers, as only then can intrageneration equity be achieved. Second, seeking to ensure equality among places with different energy sources, the government should promote the development of generation facilities using different renewable energy sources. Third, the short-term electricity market, which may allow energy prosumers to participate, should be developed.

show abstract

“…Firstly, we consider how the evaluation would look like if damages were equally distributed on a per capita basis, that is, where d irt = D rt /P rt . However, the damage of climate change are not likely to be evenly distributed between countries or individuals (Tol, 2002;Tol et al, 2004;Kverndokk and Rose, 2008;Yohe et al, 2006). Therefore, we secondly consider a damage function approach where the distribution of damages can be captured by an income elasticity.…”

Section: Inequality Within Regionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequality and the Social Cost of Carbon

Anthoff

Emmerling

2016

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a novel way to disentangle inequality aversion over time from inequality aversion between regions in the computation of the Social Cost of Carbon. Our approach nests a standard efficiency based Social Cost of Carbon estimate and an equity weighted Social Cost of Carbon estimate as special cases. We also present a methodology to incorporate more fine grained regional resolutions of income and damage distributions than typically found in integrated assessment models. Finally, we present quantitative estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon that use our disentangling of different types of inequality aversion. We use two integrated assessment models (FUND and RICE) for our numerical exercise to get more robust findings. Our results suggest that inequality considerations lead to a higher (lower) SCC values in high (low) income regions relative to an efficiency based approach, but that the effect is less strong than found in previous studies that use equity weighting. Our central estimate is that the Social Cost of Carbon increases roughly by a factor of 2.5 from a US perspective when our disentangled equity weighting approach is used.

show abstract

Equity and Justice in Global Warming Policy

Cited by 48 publications

References 121 publications

Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements

Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements

The Role of Renewable Energy Prosumers in Implementing Energy Justice Theory

Inequality and the Social Cost of Carbon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About