Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 287–317

Climate Policy without Tears CGE-Based Ancillary Benefits Estimates for Chile

  • Sébastien Dessus
  • David O'Connor
Article

Abstract

This study examines a hithertoneglected set of benefits from climate policy,viz., the reduction in emissions of localair pollutants and the associated healthbenefits, in this case for residents ofSantiago de Chile. By using an economy-widemodel, we are able to compare these monetisedbenefits to the direct costs of carbonabatement, thereby determining the scope for “no regrets” CO2 reductions. Sensitivityanalysis is performed in recognition of theuncertainty surrounding certain key parameterand exogenous variable values – notably,households' willingness to pay (WTP) forreduced mortality and morbidity risk, and thesubstitution elasticities among energy sourcesand between energy and other inputs. Ourresults suggest that, even with the mostconservative assumptions (low WTP, lowelasticities), Chile could reduce CO2emissions by almost 20% from the 2010 baselinewith no net welfare loss, though a 10%reduction is closer to “optimal”. If insteadChile were to target a 20% reduction inparticulate concentrations, a particulate taxwould incur slightly lower costs than anequivalent carbon tax to achieve the samehealth benefits. While the latter is asecond-best method of addressing localpollution, the welfare loss of choosing thisinstrument could be fully compensated by carboncredit sales at a world market price of$20/tC.

ancillary benefits carbon tax CGE modelling climate change “no regrets” abatement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alberini, A., M. Cropper, T.-T. Fu, A. Krupnick, J.-T. Liu, D. Shaw and W. Harrington (1997), ‘Valuing Health Effects of Air Pollution in Developing Countries: The Case of Taiwan’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34, 107–126.Google Scholar
  2. Armington, P. (1969), ‘A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production’, IMF Staff Papers 16(1), 159–178.Google Scholar
  3. Ayres, R. U. and J. Walter (1991), ‘The Greenhouse Effect: Damages, Costs and Abatement’, Environmental and Resource Economics 1, 237–270.Google Scholar
  4. Barker, T. and K. E. Rosendahl (2000), ‘Ancillary Benefits of GHG Mitigation in Europe: SO2, NOx, and PM-10 reductions to meet Kyoto targets using the E3ME model and EXTERNE valuations’, in OECD, op. cit., 413–451.Google Scholar
  5. Beghin, J. and S. Dessus (1999), ‘Double Dividend with Trade Distortions: Analytical Results and Evidence from Chile’, Working Paper 99-WP 225, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University, Ames, September.Google Scholar
  6. Beghin, J., D. Roland-Holst and D. van der Mensbrugghe (1994), ‘Trade and Pollution Linkages: Piecemeal Reform and Optimal Intervention’, Technical Paper No. 99, OECD Development Centre, Paris, October.Google Scholar
  7. Beghin, J., S. Dessus, D. Roland-Holst and D. van der Mensbrugghe (1996), ‘General Equilibrium Modelling of Trade and the Environment’, Technical Paper No. 116, OECD Development Centre, Paris, September.Google Scholar
  8. Beghin J., B. Bowland, S. Dessus, D. Roland-Holst and D. van der Mensbrugghe (2002), ‘Trade Integration, Environmental Degradation, and Public Health in Chile: Assessing the Linkages’, Environment and Development Economics 7, 45–71.Google Scholar
  9. Boyd, R., K. Krutilla and W. K. Viscusi (1995), ‘Energy Taxation as a Policy Instrument to Reduce CO2 Emissions: A Net Benefit Analysis’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29, 1–24.Google Scholar
  10. Burniaux, J.-M., G. Nicoletti and J. Oliveira-Martins (1992), ‘GREEN: A Global Model for Quantifying the Costs of Policies to Curb CO2 Emissions’, OECD Economic Studies 19, 49–92.Google Scholar
  11. Burtraw, D. and M. Toman (1997), ‘The Benefits of Reduced Air Pollutants in the U.S. From Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies’, Discussion Paper 98-01-REV, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., November.Google Scholar
  12. Bussolo, M. and D. O'Connor (2001), ‘Clearing the Air in India: The Economics of Climate Policy with Ancillary Benefits’, OECD Development Centre Technical Paper No. 182, Paris, November.Google Scholar
  13. Cifuentes, L. A., E. Sauma, H. Jorquera and F. Soto (1999), ‘Co-Controls Benefits Analysis for Chile: Preliminary Estimation of the Potential Co-Control Benefits for Chile’, COP-5 Progress Report, School of Engineering, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, October, revised 12 November.Google Scholar
  14. Cifuentes, L. A., J. Vega, K. Köpfer and L. B. Lave (2000), ‘Effect of the Fine Fraction of Particulate Matter versus the Coarse Mass and Other Pollutants on Daily Mortality in Santiago, Chile’, Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 50, 1287–1298.Google Scholar
  15. Cifuentes, L. A., J. J. Prieto and J. Escobari (2001), ‘Valuing Mortality Risk Reduction at Present and Future Ages: Results from a Contingent Valuation Study in Chile’, Santiago, mimeo.Google Scholar
  16. CONAMA (1997), Plan de Prevencion y Descontaminacion Atmosférica de la Region Metropolitana, 1 July, Santiago.Google Scholar
  17. Cropper, M. L., N. B. Simon, A. Alberini and P. K. Sharma (1997), ‘The Health Effects of Air Pollution in Delhi, India’, World Bank Policy Research Department, Working Paper No. 1860, December.Google Scholar
  18. DeCanio, S. J. (1998), ‘The Efficiency Paradox: Bureaucratic and Organizational Barriers to Profitable Energy-Saving Investment’, Energy Policy 26(5), 441–454.Google Scholar
  19. Dessus, S. and D. O'Connor (1999), ‘Climate Policy without Tears: CGE-Based Ancillary Benefits Estimates for Chile’, Technical Paper No.156, OECD Development Centre, Paris.Google Scholar
  20. Dessus, S., D. Roland-Holst and D. van der Mensbrugghe (1994), ‘Input-Based Pollution Estimates for Environmental Assessment in Developing Countries’, Technical Paper No. 101, OECD Development Centre, Paris.Google Scholar
  21. Desvousges, W. H., F. R. Johnson and H. S. Banzhaf (1998), Environmental Policy Analysis with Limited Information: Principles and Applications of the Transfer Method. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  22. Ekins, P. (1995), ‘Rethinking the Costs Related to Global Warming: A Survey of the Issues’, Environmental and Resource Economics 6, 231–277.Google Scholar
  23. Ekins, P. (1996), ‘How Large a Carbon Tax is Justified by the Secondary Benefits of CO2 Abatement?’, Resource and Energy Economics 18, 161–187.Google Scholar
  24. EPA (1997), ‘Appendix D: Human Health and Welfare Effects of Criteria Pollutants’, in The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  25. EPA (2000), Developing Country Case-Studies: Integrated Strategies for Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation. Progress Report for the International Co-Control Benefits Analysis Program, November, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  26. Eskeland, G. S. and J. Xie (1997), ‘Acting Globally while Thinking Locally: Is the Global Environment Protected by Transport Emission Control Programs?’, World Bank, Washington, D.C., processed.Google Scholar
  27. Garbaccio, R. F., M. S. Ho and D. W. Jorgenson (2000), ‘The Health Benefits of Controlling Carbon Emissions in China’, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 16 March, processed.Google Scholar
  28. Hettige, H., P. Martin, M. Singh and D. Wheeler (1995), ‘The Industrial Pollution Projection System’, Policy Research Working Paper 1431, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., March.Google Scholar
  29. IEA (1998), CO 2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion, 1971–1996. IEA/OECD, Paris: IEA Statistics.Google Scholar
  30. INIA (1997), Project “Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the Non Energy Sector: Agriculture, Forestry and Land Use Change”. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Chile, November.Google Scholar
  31. Krupnick, A., K. Harrison, E. Nickell and M. Toman (1996), ‘The Value of Health Benefits from Ambient Air Quality Improvements in Central and Eastern Europe: An Exercise in Benefits Transfer’, Environmental and Resource Economics 7, 307–332.Google Scholar
  32. Krupnick, A., A. Alberini, R. Belli, M. Cropper and N. Simon (1999), ‘New Directions in Mortality Risk Valuation and Stated Preference Methods: Executive Summary’, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington, D.C. (http://es.epa/gov/ncerqa/final/krupnick.html).Google Scholar
  33. Liu, J.-T., J. K. Hammitt and J.-L. Liu (1997), 'Estimated Hedonic Wage Function and Value of Life in a Developing Country”, Economic Letters 57, 353–358.Google Scholar
  34. Liu, J.-T., J. K. Hammitt, J.-D. Wang and J.-L. Liu (2000), ‘Mother's Willingness to Pay for Her Own and Her Child's Health: A Contingent Valuation Study in Taiwan’, Health Economics 9, 319–326.Google Scholar
  35. Loehman, E. and V. H. De (1982), ‘Application of Stochastic Choice Modelling to Policy Analysis of Public Goods: A Case Study of Air Quality Improvements’, Review of Economics and Statistics 64(3), 474–480.Google Scholar
  36. Lvovsky, K., G. Hughes, D. Maddison, B. Ostro and D. Pearce (1999), Environmental Costs of Fossil Fuels: A Rapid Assessment Method with Application to Six Cities. World Bank, processed.Google Scholar
  37. Markandya, A. (1998), ‘The Indirect Costs and Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Limitations’, Handbook Reports: Economics of Greenhouse Gas Limitations. UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment, Riso National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark.Google Scholar
  38. Markandya, A. and R. Boyd (1999), ‘The Indirect Costs and Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Limitations: Mauritius Case Study’, Handbook Reports: Economics of Greenhouse Gas Limitations. UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment, Riso National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark.Google Scholar
  39. Mitchell, R. C. and R. T. Carson (1986), Valuing Drinking Water Risk Reduction Using the Contingent Valuation Method: A Methodological Study of Risks from THM and Giardia. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  40. O'Ryan, R. (1996), ‘Cost-Effective Policies to Improve Urban Air Quality in Santiago, Chile’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31, 302–313.Google Scholar
  41. Ostro, B., J. M. Sanchez, C. Aranda and G. S. Eskeland (1996), ‘Air Pollution and Mortality: Results from a Study of Santiago, Chile’, Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 6(1), 97–114.Google Scholar
  42. Ostro, B., G. S. Eskeland, T. Feyzioglu and J. M. Sanchez (1998), ‘Air Pollution and Health Effects: A Study of Respiratory Illness Among Children in Santiago, Chile’, March, processed.Google Scholar
  43. Pearce, D. (1992), ‘The Secondary Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Control’, CSERGE Working Paper 92–12, Revised, April.Google Scholar
  44. Rogat, J., E. Figueroa and L. Firinguetti (1996), ‘An Estimation of the Economic Value of Air Quality Improvement Program in Santiago de Chile’, EEU Reprint Series No. 1996:3, Environmental Economics Unit, Göteborg University.Google Scholar
  45. Sadoulet, E. and A. de Janvry (1995), Quantitative Development Policy Analysis. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schwartz, J. (1994), ‘Air Pollution and Daily Mortality: A Review and Meta-Analysis’, Environmental Research 64, 36–52.Google Scholar
  47. Simon, N. B., M. L. Cropper, A. Alberini and S. Arora (1999), ‘Valuing Mortality Reductions in India: A Study of Compensating Wage Differentials’, Working Paper No.2078, World Bank Policy Research Department, January.Google Scholar
  48. UNDP (2000), Human Development Report 2000 Statistical Annex, downloaded from UNDP Human Development Report website: http://www.undp.org/hdro/highlights/statistics.html.Google Scholar
  49. Viscusi, W. K. (1993), ‘The Value of Risks to Life and Health’, Journal of Economic Literature 31, 1912–1946.Google Scholar
  50. Wang, X. and K. R. Smith (1999), Near-Term Health Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Reductions: A Proposed Assessment Method and Application in Two Energy Sectors of China. World Health Organisation, Geneva: Department of Protection of the Human Environment (WHO/SDE/PHE/99.01), March.Google Scholar
  51. Weitzman, M. L. (1974), ‘Prices vs. Quantities’, Review of Economic Studies 41, 477–491.Google Scholar
  52. WHO (1989), Management and Control of the Environment. WHO/PEP/89.1, Geneva.Google Scholar
  53. Working Group on Public Health and Fossil-Fuel Combustion (1997), ‘Short-Term Improvements in Public Health from Global-Climate Policies on Fossil-Fuel Combustion: An Interim Report’, The Lancet 350(9088), 1341–1349.Google Scholar
  54. World Bank (1994), Chile. Managing Environmental Problems: Economic Analysis of Selected Issues, 19 December (Report No. 13061-CH).Google Scholar
  55. World Bank (1998), World Development Report 1998/99: Knowledge for Development. Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press for The World Bank.Google Scholar
  56. Xu, X., J. Gao, D. W. Dockery and Y. Chen (1994), ‘Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in Residential Areas of Beijing, China’, Archives of Environmental Health (July/August) 49(4), 216–222.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sébastien Dessus
    • 1
  • David O'Connor
    • 2
  1. 1.World BankFrance
  2. 2.OECD Development CentreParisFrance

Personalised recommendations