Skip to main content

The mitigation potential of eco-taxation on carbon emissions: income effects under downward rigid wages


Eco-taxation is the preferred market based tool for achieving mitigation of CO2 emissions and fostering sustainability. It works through tax-induced changes in the price of polluting activities while ideally transferring the environmental cost to emitters and users. The initial eco-tax signaling is transmitted and further amplified to the rest of the economy through the structure of cost interactions. In particular, real-world economies work under wage adjustment rules that reflect downward rigidity in labor costs when facing rising prices. These common rules may affect the mitigation capacity of the eco-tax policies. We study this issue using an inter-industry model in which we overcome the classical dichotomy between prices and quantities thanks to the novelty of connecting consumption demand with the changes in private income levels that would follow from the enacted eco-tax. We isolate income effects by keeping the given productive structure of the economy as unaltered as possible. In this sense, the proposed model has a bit of a neo-ricardian flavor. We implement the model and check the mitigation effectiveness of two different eco-tax policies using recent tabular data for the Spanish economy in 2015. The main conclusion is that we would not observe double benefits, even when all eco-tax collections are recycled back into the economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    We use CONOPT as the default solver and the algorithm DNLP available within CONOPT.


  1. André FJ, Cardenete MA, Velazquez E (2005) Performing an environmental tax reform in a regional economy. A computable general equilibrium approach. Ann Reg Sci 39:375–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bardazzi R (1996) Reduction in Social Security contributions: which alternatives for financing coverage? Econ Syst Res 8(3):247–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bosquet B (2000) Environmental tax reform: does it work? A survey of the empirical evidence. Ecol Econ 34:19–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cardenete MA, Guerra AI, Sancho F (2016) Applied general equilibrium: an introduction, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. De Souza KB, de Santana LC, Perobelli FS (2016) Reducing Brazilian greenhouse emissions: scenario simulations of targets and policies. Econ Syst Res 28(4):482–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Freire J, Ho MS (2019) Carbon taxes and the double dividend hypothesis in a recursive-dynamic CGE model for Spain. Econ Syst Res 31(2):267–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fullerton D, Muehlegger E (2019) Who bears the economic burden of environmental regulations? Rev Environ Econ Policy 13(1):62–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gemechu ED, Butnar I, Llop M, Castells F (2014) Economic and environmental effects of CO2 taxation: an input-output analysis for Spain. J Environ Plan Manag 57(5):751–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Guerra AI, Sancho F (2018) On the need to compensate the compensating variation in CGE modeling. Econ Syst Res 30(3):313–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Guerra AI, Manresa A, Sancho F (2018) The true index of cost of living under general equilibrium: the numéraire matters. Econ Lett 173:69–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. INE (2014) Boletín Informativo del Instituto Nacional de Estadística, n.8. Madrid, Spain

  12. Kiuila O, Matkandya A, Scasny M (2019) Taxing air pollutants and carbon individually or jointly: results from a CGE model enriched by an emission abatement. Econc Syst Res 31(1):21–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Llop M, Pié L (2008) Input–output analysis of alternative policies implemented on the energy activities. Energy Policy 36:1642–1648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Maxim MR, Zander K (2019) Can a green tax reform entail employment double dividend in European and non-European countries? A survey of the empirical evidence. Int J Energy Econ Policy 9(3):218–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Maxim MR (2020) Environmental fiscal reform and the possibility of triple dividend in European and non-European countries: evidence from a meta-regression analysis. Environ Econ Policy Stud.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Miller RE, Blair PD (2009) Input–output analysis: foundations and extensions, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. OECD (2019) Taxing energy use 2019: using taxes for climate action. OECD Publishing, Paris.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Padilla E, Duro JA (2013) Explanatory factors of CO2 per capita emission inequality in the European Union. Energy Policy 62:1320–1328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Roland-Holst D, Sancho F (1995) Modeling prices in a SAM structure. Rev Econ Stat 77(2):361–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rose A (1983) Technological change and input–output analysis: an appraisal. Socio Econ Plan Sci 18(5):305–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shoven JB, Whalley J (1984) Applied general equilibrium models of taxation and international trade: an introduction and survey. J Econ Lit 22:1007–1051

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sraffa P (1960) Production of commodities by means of commodities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references


I would like to acknowledge support from research project MICINN-ECO2017-85534P. I am also grateful to two referees for their excellent points and suggestions for improvement. Needless to say, any remaining errors are solely my own.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferran Sancho.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sancho, F. The mitigation potential of eco-taxation on carbon emissions: income effects under downward rigid wages. Environ Econ Policy Stud 23, 93–107 (2021).

Download citation


  • Mitigation
  • Eco-taxation
  • Tax recycling
  • Wage adjustment

JEL Classification

  • C57
  • Q41
  • Q52
  • Q58