, Volume 3, Issue 1–2, pp 111–132 | Cite as

Cost effectiveness of a combination of instruments for global warming: a quantitative approach for Spain

  • M. C. Gallastegui
  • M. González-Eguino
  • I. Galarraga
Open Access
Original Article


Climate change is an important environmental problem and one whose economic implications are many and varied. This paper starts with the presumption that mitigation of greenhouse gases is a necessary policy that has to be designed in a cost effective way. It is well known that market instruments are the best option for cost effectiveness. But the discussion regarding which of the various market instruments should be used, how they may interact and what combinations of policies should be implemented is still open and very lively. In this paper we propose a combination of instruments: the marketable emission permits already in place in Europe for major economic sectors and a CO2 tax for economic sectors not included in the emissions permit scheme. The study uses an applied general equilibrium model for the Spanish economy to compute the results obtained with the new mix of instruments proposed. As the combination of the market for emission permits and the CO2 tax admits different possibilities that depend on how the mitigation is distributed among the economic sectors, we concentrate on four possibilities: cost-effective, equalitarian, proportional to emissions, and proportional to output distributions. Other alternatives to the CO2 tax are also analysed (tax on energy, on oil and on electricity). Our findings suggest that careful, well designed policies are needed as any deviation imposes significant additional costs that increase more than proportionally to the level of emissions reduction targeted by the EU.


Environmental policy instruments Applied general equilibrium models Cap and trade CO2 tax Climate policy 

JEL Classification

D58 H21 


  1. Aldy JE, Krupnick AJ, Newell RG, Parry, IWH, Pizer WA (2009) Designing climate mitigation policy. RFF discussion paper, 08-16-REVGoogle Scholar
  2. Alesina AF, Passarelli F (2010) Regulation versus taxation. NBER working paper no. 16413Google Scholar
  3. Ansuategi A, Galarraga I (2009) Carbon pricing as an effective instrument of climate policy: searching for an optimal policy instrument. Rivista di Politica Economica, VII-IXGoogle Scholar
  4. Arto I, Gallastegui MC, Ansuategi A (2009) Accounting for early action in the European Union Emission Trading Scheme. Energy Policy 37: 3194–3924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Babiker MH, Mayer M, Wieng I, Hyman R (2001) The MIT emissions prediction and policy analysis EPPA model. MIT Global Change Joint Program, 71, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  6. Baranzini A, Goldemberg J, Speck S (2000) A future for carbon taxes: survey. Ecol Econ 32: 395–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baumol WJ, Oates WE (1971) The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. Swedish J Econ 73: 42–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baumol WJ, Oates WE (1988) The theory of environmental policy, 2nd edn. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Böhringer C, Rosendahl KE (2010) Green promotes the dirtiest: on the interaction between black and green quotas in energy markets. J Regul Econ 37: 316–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boots M (2003) Green certificates and carbon trading in the Netherlands. Energy Policy 31(1): 43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. COD (2008) Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the community’s greenhouse gas emission reduction commitment up to 2020. 2008/0014 (COD)Google Scholar
  12. Dellink R, Hofkes M, van Ierland E, Verbruggen H (2004) Dynamic modelling of pollution abatement in a CGE framework. Econ Model 21(6): 965–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Del Río P (2009) Interactions between climate and energy policies: the case of Spain. Clim Policy 9: 119–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Del Río P, Labandeira X, Linares P (2009) La interacción del sistema europeo de comercio de emisiones con otros instrumentos de política. Papeles de Economía Española 121: 211–224Google Scholar
  15. Eurostat (2005) Energy, transport and environment. European Statistic Office, LuxemburgGoogle Scholar
  16. Faehn T, Gómez-Plana A, Kverndokk S (2009) Can a carbon permit system reduce Spanish unemployment?. Energy Econ 31(4): 595–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallastegui MC, Galarraga I (2010) La Unión Europea Frente al Cambio Climático: El Paquete de Medidas sobre Cambio Climático y Energía (20-20-20). In: Becker F, Cazorla LM, Martínez-Simancas J (eds) Tratado de Energías Renovables. Iberdrola-Thomson-AranzadiGoogle Scholar
  18. Gallastegui MC, Iñarra E, Prellezo R (2002) Bankruptcy of fishing resources: the Northern European anglerfish fishery. Mar Resour Econ 17(4):291–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gollier C (2010) Ecological discounting. J Econ Theory 145: 812–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. González-Eguino M (2010) Modelización de los coste de mitigación de emisiones: el caso de un mercado de permisos de emisión para España. Trimestre Económico 305(1): 185–218Google Scholar
  21. Goulder LH, Parry I (2008) Instruments choice in environmental policy. Resource for the future. Discussion Paper 08-07, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Goulder LH, Stavins RN (2010) Interactions between state and federal climate change policies. Foundazione Eni Enrico Mattei Working Papers, 487Google Scholar
  23. Goulder LH, Parry I, Williams RC III, Burtraw DT (1999) The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting. J Public Econ 72: 329–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Green KP, Hayward SF, Hassett KA (2007) Climate change: cap vs. Taxes. Environmental Policy Outlook, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, AEI, no. 2, JuneGoogle Scholar
  25. Hahn RW (1989) Economic prescriptions for environmental problems: how the patient followed the doctor’s orders. J Econ Perspect 3(2): 95–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hahn RW (2000) The impact of economics on environmental policy. J Environ Econ Manag 39: 375–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hauser T, Bradley R, Childs B, Werkman J, Heilmayr R (2008) Leveling the carbon playing field: international competition and US climate policy design. Peterson Institute for International Economics, World Resource Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  28. Hayashi F (1982) Tobin’s q, rational expectations and optimal investment rule. Econometrica 50: 213–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heyes A (2000) Implementing environmental regulation: enforcement and compliance. J Regul Econ 17: 107–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoel M (1990) Efficient international agreements for reducing emissions of CO2. University of Oslo Working papers. Department of EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  31. Hoel M, Karp LS (2002) Taxes versus quotas for a stock pollutant. Resour Energy Econ 24: 367–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hourcade JC, Neuhoff K, Demailly D, Sato M (2008) Differentiation and dynamics of EU ETS industrial competitiveness impacts. Climate Strategies PapersGoogle Scholar
  33. INE (2002) Cuentas Económicas. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, MadridGoogle Scholar
  34. Kolstad CD, Toman M (2005) The economics of climate policy. In: Mäler KG, Vincent J (eds) Handbook of environmental economics, vol 3. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1561–1618Google Scholar
  35. Krutilla K (1999) Environmental policy and transactions cost. In: van den Bergh (eds) Handbook of environmental and resource economics. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  36. Labandeira X, Rodríguez M (2007) Wide and narrow approaches to national climate policies: a case study for Spain. Clim Policy 10(1): 51–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Linares P, Santos FJ, Ventosa M (2008) Interactions of carbon reduction and renewable support policies in electricity markets: a review of existing results and some recommendations for a coordinated regulation. Clim Policy 8(4): 377–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Manresa A, Sancho F (2005) Implementing a double dividend: recycling ecotaxes towards lower labour taxes. Energy Policy 33(12): 1577–1585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Morthorst PE (2003) National environmental targets and international emission reduction instruments. Energy Policy 31: 73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Newell RG, Stavins RN (2003) Cost heterogeneity and potential savings from market-based policies. J Regul Econ 23: 43–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nordhaus WD (2008) The challenge of global warming: economic models and environmental policy. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  42. OECD (2009) The cost-effectiveness of climate change mitigation policy instruments. In: The economics of climate change mitigation: policies and options for global action beyond 2012. ParisGoogle Scholar
  43. Parry I, Pizer B (2007) Combating global warming: is taxation or cap-and-trade the better strategy for reducing greenhouse emissions. Regulation 30(3):18–22Google Scholar
  44. Pearce D (2006) The political economy of an energy tax: the United Kingdom’s climate change levy. Energy Econ 28: 149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rutherford T, Paltsev S (2000) GTAP-EG: incorporating energy statistics into GTAP format. WP, University of ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  46. Shoven J, Whalley J (1992) Applying general equilibrium. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  47. Sijm J (2003) Interaction of the EU emissions trading directive with climate policy instruments in the Netherlands. Policy brief INTERACT project. ECN, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  48. Sijm J (2005) The interaction between the EU emissions trading scheme and national energy policies. Clim Policy 5: 79–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sijm J (2007) Options for post-2012 EU burden sharing and EU ETS allocation. ECN and MNP Working paperGoogle Scholar
  50. Springer U (2003) The market for tradable GHG permits under the Kyoto protocol: a survey of model studies. Energy Econ 25: 527–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stern N (2008) The economics of climate change. Am Econ Rev 98(2): 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tietenberg T (1990) Economic instruments for environmental regulation. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 6(1): 17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tirole J (2010) From Pigou to extended liability: on the optimal taxation of externalities under imperfect financial markets. Rev Econ Stud 77(2):697–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Uzawa H (2003) Economic theory and global warming. Cambridge University Press. ISBN:052182386-2Google Scholar
  55. Weitzman ML (1974) Prices versus quantities. Rev Econ Stud 41: 477–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Weyant JP (ed) (1999) The costs of the Kyoto protocol: a multi-model evaluation. Energy J 20:1–398Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2011

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. Open Acces This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. C. Gallastegui
    • 1
  • M. González-Eguino
    • 2
  • I. Galarraga
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Economic Analysis IUniversity of the Basque Country UPV-EHUBilbaoSpain
  2. 2.Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3)-Klima Aldaketa IkergaiBilbaoSpain

Personalised recommendations