Equity-efficiency trade-off in China's energy capping policy

被引:21
|
作者
Guo, Jin [1 ,4 ]
Du, Limin [2 ]
Wei, Chu [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Natl Dev & Reform Commiss, Acad Macroecon Res, Beijing 100038, Peoples R China
[2] Zhejiang Univ, China Acad West Reg Dev, Hangzhou 310058, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[3] Renmin Univ China, Sch Econ, Dept Energy Econ, 59 Zhongguancun St, Beijing 100872, Peoples R China
[4] Renmin Univ China, Natl Acad Dev & Strategy, Beijing 100872, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Equity; Efficiency; Trade-off; Energy cap; China; GLOBAL WARMING POLICY; EMISSIONS; ALLOCATION; ABATEMENT; SCHEME; DECENTRALIZATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.017
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
As a part of the transition to a sustainable economy, China has set a cap on primary energy consumption for the first time, of 5.0 billion tonnes of standard coal equivalent by 2020. However, there is a debate on the cap feasibility and failure to adequately address the underlying equity-efficiency trade-off, which hampers achievement. This paper identifies some key challenges ahead, including the coal-dominant energy mix, declining financial support, inconsistent central-local goals, rising costs of energy-saving measures and quality of energy statistical data. By quantifying the preference of each providence toward equity-based or efficiency-based allocation schemes, the great disparity among provinces is revealed and the equity-efficiency trade-off relationship is confirmed. Developing regions, primarily located in central and western areas, tend to favor equity based disaggregating schemes. Contrarily, developed coastal provinces strongly favor efficiency-based schemes. The present national disaggregation schemes are mainly based on historical energy consumption, but disregard the provincial development gap and efficiency factors. We conclude that this ambitious goal is likely within reach, but increased efforts and flexible instruments are needed.
引用
收藏
页码:57 / 65
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Public pension policy and the equity-efficiency trade-off*
    Gustafsson, Johan
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2023, 125 (03): : 717 - 752
  • [2] The equity-efficiency trade-off reconsidered
    Georg Tillmann
    Social Choice and Welfare, 2005, 24 : 63 - 81
  • [3] QALYS AND THE EQUITY-EFFICIENCY TRADE-OFF
    WAGSTAFF, A
    JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1991, 10 (01) : 21 - 41
  • [4] The equity-efficiency trade-off reconsidered
    Tillmann, G
    SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2005, 24 (01) : 63 - 81
  • [5] THE EQUITY-EFFICIENCY TRADE-OFF - BREIT RECONSIDERED
    LAMBERT, PJ
    OXFORD ECONOMIC PAPERS-NEW SERIES, 1990, 42 (01): : 91 - 104
  • [6] FISCAL ASPECTS OF THE EQUITY-EFFICIENCY TRADE-OFF
    Dalamagas, Basil
    Leventides, John
    Tantos, Stefanos
    GLOBAL ECONOMY JOURNAL, 2023, 23 (01N04)
  • [7] The Equity-Efficiency Trade-off in Environmental Policy: Evidence from Stated Preferences
    Dietz, Simon
    Atkinson, Giles
    LAND ECONOMICS, 2010, 86 (03) : 423 - 443
  • [8] A note on the estimation of the equity-efficiency trade-off for QALYs
    Johannesson, M
    Gerdtham, UG
    JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1996, 15 (03) : 359 - 368
  • [9] A spatial macroeconomic analysis of the equity-efficiency trade-off of the European cohesion policy
    Barbero, Javier
    Christou, Tryfonas
    Crucitti, Francesca
    Rodriguez, Abian Garcia
    Lazarou, Nicholas-Joseph
    Monfort, Philippe
    Salotti, Simone
    SPATIAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, 2024, 19 (03) : 394 - 410
  • [10] Natural disaster insurance and the equity-efficiency trade-off
    Picard, Pierre
    JOURNAL OF RISK AND INSURANCE, 2008, 75 (01) : 17 - 38