The cost-effectiveness of agricultural greenhouse gas reduction under diverse carbon policies in China

Abstract

PurposeMitigating agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is an essential part of China's effort to achieve net-zero emissions. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of China's agricultural GHG reduction under diverse carbon policies.Design/methodology/approachThe study employs a parametric non-radial distance function approach and estimates the technical abatement potential and marginal abatement cost (MAC) of GHG in China's agricultural sector for the 2008–2017 period.FindingsAgriculture is expected to make a great contribution to China's net-zero emissions progress. This study empirically analyses the cost-effectiveness of China's agricultural GHG reduction under diverse carbon policies. A parametric non-radial distance function approach is used to derive technical abatement potential and MAC of GHG for the 2008–2017 period. The results indicate that no significant improvement had been achieved in terms of agricultural GHG reduction in China during 2008–2017. The country's agricultural sector could reduce 20–40% GHG emissions with a mean value of 31%. In general, western provinces have larger reduction potential than eastern ones. The average MAC for the whole country is 4,656 yuan/ton CO2e during 2008–2017. For most western provinces, their MAC values are considerably higher than those for most eastern provinces. Compared with previous sectoral estimates of GHG mitigation cost, this study’s estimates indicate that reducing agricultural GHG emissions in some provinces is likely to be cost-effective. The Chinese government should consider expanding its national carbon market to cover agricultural sector.Practical implicationsThe Chinese government should consider expanding its national carbon market to cover agricultural sector.Originality/valueExisting studies in the field mostly ignore input constraints, which is inconsistent with carbon mitigation policy practice, especially in the agricultural sector. This study’s approach integrates both input and output constraints reflecting differing policy practice.

Is the technical efficiency green? The environmental efficiency of agricultural production in the MENA region

“…Tang et al (2016) estimated the marginal abatement costs of on-farm GHG emissions for a broadacre farming system in the Great Southern Region of Western Australia. However, there is a dearth of studies on EE in developing countries, although the relationship between agricultural production and environmental impacts may be much more intense in this context due to low agricultural input efficiency (Clark and Tilman, 2017;Yang et al, 2017;Expósito and Velasco, 2020;Tang and Ma, 2022). Even fewer studies have explicitly assessed the EE of agricultural production in MENA countries.…”

Effects of Sustainable Regulations at Agricultural International Market Failures: A Dynamic Approach

“…The adverse effects of agricultural emissions on the environment and human health have led to several potential mitigating strategies, such as improved feed quality, improved manure management, greater nitrogen use efficiency, better water management, conservation practices that help prevent soil erosion, manipulating animal diets, input and output constraints, removing subsidies to agriculture, adoption of environmental tax policies and increasing the role of agroforestry in agriculture, among others [6][7][8][9][10]. As a consequence of these strategies and policy intervention, a substantial decrease in emissions has been observed in Europe since 1990.…”

The Impact of Financial Deepening on Carbon Reductions in China: Evidence from City- and Enterprise-Level Data

“…For many developing economies, effective carbon reductions have become a prime importance of policymakers. A typical example is China, the world’s largest developing economy and top carbon emitter [ 4 , 5 ]. However, most developing economies, including China, are still in their industrialization and urbanization process, which means that the demand for energy and the associated carbon emissions are highly likely to continue increasing [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 ].…”