Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 121, Issue 1–4, pp 181–203 | Cite as

Energy and Climate Policy Analysis with the Hybrid Bottom-Up Computable General Equilibrium Model SCREEN: The Case of the Swiss CO2 Act

  • Gürkan KumbaroğluEmail author
  • Reinhard Madlener


This paper shows how bottom-up activity analyses within a dynamic computable general equilibrium framework can be undertaken for the longer-term analysis of energy and climate policies using the model SCREEN [25]. In particular we demonstrate for the case of Switzerland how the impact of policy measures to reduce the carbon intensity of the energy sector can be assessed with such a model for various socio-economic and environmental dimensions (e.g., C02 emissions, GDP, employment, foreign exchange rate). The results can provide valuable insights for the appropriate design of energy or climate policies that allow for the targeted fostering of a more sustainable energy development.

dynamic computable general equilibrium model mixed complementarity problem top-down bottom-up modeling sustainable energy policy climate change environmental taxation energy–economy interactions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    B. Aebischer, E. Jochem and C. Schmid, The voluntary agreement of the Swiss economy in the context of the Swiss CO2 law, in: Proceedings of the 2001 SAEE Annual Conference “Applied Energy Economics and Policy Research”, Zurich, 17 October 2001 (Swiss Association of Energy Economics (SAEE), Zurich, 2001) pp. 105–119.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Y. Arıkan and G. Kumbaroğlu, Endogenising emission taxes. A general equilibrium type optimisation model applied for Turkey, Energy Policy 29(12) (2001) 1045–1056.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    P.S. Armington, A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production, International Monetary Fund Staff Papers 16(1) (March 1969) 170–201.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    O. Bahn, E. Fragnière and S. Kypreos, Swiss energy taxation options to curb CO2 emissions, European Environment 8(3) (1998) 94–101.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    O. Bahn and C. Frei, GEM-E3 Switzerland: a computable general equilibrium model applied for Switzerland, PSI Report No. 00–01, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland (January 2000).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. Banfi, M. Filippini and C. Luchsinger, Deregulation of the Swiss Electricity Industry: short-run implications for the hydro-power sector, The Electricity Journal 15(6) (2002) 69–77.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    BFE, EnergieSchweiz, Das Nachfolgeprogramm von Energie, 2000, Swiss Federal Agency of Energy, Berne, January (2001) (Bundesamt für Energie, BFE), energieschweiz/index.html.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    BFS, Swiss Labor Force Survey 1991, Swiss Federal Agency of Statistics, Berne (1992) (Schweizerische Arbeitskräfteerhebung – SAKE, Bundesamt für Statistik, BFS), stat_ch/ber03/sake/dtfr03.htm.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    C. Böhringer, The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down in energy policy modelling, Energy Economics 20(3) (1998) 233–248.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    A.L. Bovenberg and L.H. Goulder, Costs of environmentally motivated taxes in the presence of other taxes: general equilibrium analyses, National Tax Journal 50(1) (1997) 59–87.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    A.L. Bovenberg and R.A. de Mooij, Environmental tax reform and endogenous growth, Journal of Public Economics 63(2) (1997) 207–237.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.I. Bulow and L.H. Summers, A theory of dual labor markets with application to industrial policy, discrimination, and Keynesian unemployment, Journal of Labor Economics 4(3) (1986) 376–414.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.-M. Burniaux, G. Nicoletti and J. Oliveira-Martins, GREEN: a global model for quantifying the costs of policies to curb CO2 emissions, in: OECD Economic Studies, No. 19 (1992) pp. 49–92.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J.-M. Burniaux and T.P. Truong, GTAP-E: an energy-environmental version of the GTAP Model, GTAP Technical Paper No. 16 (January 2002), Scholar
  15. [15]
    C. Carraro and M. Galeotti, Economic growth, international competitiveness and environmental protection: R&D and innovation strategies with the WARM model, Energy Economics 19(1) (1997) 2–28.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    CO2-Gesetz, Swiss CO2 Act of 8 October 1999, version as of 18 April 2000, Authorities of the Swiss Confederation, Berne (2000) (Bundesgesetz über die Reduktion der CO2-Emissionen (CO2-Gesetz) vom 8 Oktober 1999, Stand am 18 April 2000, 641.71).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    R.W. Cottle and J.S. Pang, The Linear Complementarity Problem (Academic Press, New York, 1992).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    A. De Coulon, Four essays on the labour market assimilation of immigrants in Switzerland, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Geneva, Geneva (1999).Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    S. Dirkse and M. Ferris, The PATH-Solver: a non-monotone stabilization scheme for mixed complementarity problems, Optimization Methods and Software 5 (1995) 123–156.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    EMG, Swiss Electricity Market Act of 15 December 2000 (2000) (Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz vom 15 Dezember 2000), emg/de/l.pdf; rejected in a people's referendum on 22 September 2002.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    EMV, Swiss Electricity Market Ordinance of 27 March 2002 (2000) (Elektrizitätsmarktverordnung vom 27 März 2002), mm2002/4.pdf; the accompanying electricity market act EMG was rejected in a people's referendum on 22 September 2002.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    EnG, Swiss Energy Act of 26 June 1998, version as of 19 January 1999, SR 730.0, Authorities of the Swiss Confederation, Berne (1999) (Energiegesetz vom 26 Juni 1998, Stand am 19 Januar 1999), Scholar
  23. [23]
    M.C. Ferris and T.S. Munson, GAMS/PATH user guide version 4.3 (2000), http:/ solvers/path/main.htm.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    G. Ferro-Luzzi, Inter-industry wage differentials in Switzerland, Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics 120(3) (1994) 421–443.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    C.F. Frei, Bottom-up activity analysis in a computable general equilibrium framework: case of electricity, Thesis No. 2327, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne (2001).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    C.F. Frei, P.-A. Haldi and G. Sarlos, Dynamic formulation of a top-down and bottom-up merging energy policy model, Energy Policy 31(10) (2003) 1017–1031.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    T.L. Huang et al., Empirical tests of efficiency wage models, Economica 65(257) (1998) 125–143.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    A.B. Jaffe and R.N. Stavins, The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology, Resource and Energy Economics 16(2) (1994) 91–122.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    E. Jochem et al., End-use energy efficiency, in: World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, ed. J. Goldberg (UNDP/UNDESA/WEC, New York, 2000) chapter 6.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    KEG, Swiss Nuclear Energy Act (Kernenergiegesetz); Swiss Federal Chancellory/KAV, Berne, draft version as of 3 July 2001, Scholar
  31. [31]
    C.C. Koopmans and D. Willem te Velde, Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy demand model, Energy Economics 23(1) (2001) 57–75.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    S. Messner and L. Schrattenholzer, MESSAGE-MACRO: linking an energy supply model with a macroeconomic module and solving it iteratively, Energy – The International Journal 25(3) (2000) 267–282.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    T. Müller, Integrating bottom-up and top-down models for energy policy analysis, Working paper No. 00.02, University of Genève, Centre Universitaire d'Étude Problèmes de l'Énergie (CUEPE), Genève (November 2000).Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    W.D. Nordhaus and Z. Yang, A regional dynamic general-equilibrium model of alternative climatechange strategies, The American Economic Review 86(4) (1996) 741–765.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    I.W.H. Parry and A.M. Bento, Tax deductions, environmental policy, and the double dividend hypothesis, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39(1) (2000) 67–96.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    D. Pearce, The role of carbon taxes in adjusting to global warming, The Economic Journal 101 (1991) 938–948.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    C. Perroni and T.F. Rutherford, A comparison of the performance of flexible functional forms for use in applied general equilibrium analysis (1996), Scholar
  38. [38]
    T.F. Rutherford, Extension of GAMS for complementarity problems arising in applied economic analysis, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 19(8) (1995) 1299–1324.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    T.F. Rutherford, W.D. Montgomery and P.M. Bernstein, CETM: a dynamic general equilibrium model of global energy markets, carbon dioxide emissions and international trade, Working paper No. 97–3, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO (1997).Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    C. Shapiro and J.E. Stiglitz, Equilibrium unemployment as a worker-discipline device, The American Economic Review 74(3) (1984) 433–444.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    J.B. Shoven and J. Whalley, Applying General Equilibrium (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, FCCC/CP/1997/7/Add.l, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn (1997).Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    H. Vennemo, A dynamic applied general equilibrium model with environmental feedbacks, Economic Modelling 14(1) (1997) 99–154.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    J.L. Yellen, Efficiency-wage models of unemployment, The American Economic Review 74(2) (1984) 200–205.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringBoğaziçi UniversityBebek, IstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.CEPE – Centre for Energy Policy and EconomicsSwiss Federal Institutes of TechnologyZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations