RIETI Discussion Paper Series 02-J-004
RIETI Discussion Paper Series 02-J-004 2002 2 3 (1) CO (2) (1) (2)CO (3) CO CO 2 JEL classificaion: H2, Q21, Q25, Q28, R48 3 1
COP3 2010 CO 2 1990 6 1999 1990 6.8 6 1990 23.0 2001 (1) (2) CO 2 (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (1) (3) (1) (2) (3) CGE (Compuable General Equilibrium) CES Denis and Koopman (1998)Koopman (1995) Proos and Van Dender (2001) 2
(2001) Kanemoo, Hasuike and Fujiwara (forhcoming) Kanemoo, Hasuike and Fujiwara Kanemoo, Hasuike and Fujiwara (1) (2) (1998) (1999) (1) (2) (3) CES 10 3
1 1 1 2-1 1 2 1 2 CO 2 2 = 1,2,3,4, 5 z c x z σ z 1 σ z 1 1 σ z 1 σ z 1 σ z σ z σ + z σ z c c α x x = α α c α x σ z 4
x x 1 x 2 x σ x σ x 1 σ x 1 σ x 2 1 σ x 1 1 σ x σ x σ x = 1 1 2 α x + α x 2 CES σ1 i = 0.12, i = 1, 2,3 z σ z = 1.1 c x 1 σ 1 =1.5 x 11 1 x 12 2 x 13 x 111 x 112 x 121 x 122 x 131 x 132 x σ x =1.1 x 2 σ 2 = 3 x 11 1 x 12 2 x 23 σ 2 i = 0.16, i = 1, 2,3 x 211 x 212 x 221 x 222 x 231 x 232 α1 α 2 σ x α σ 5
x i = 3 j= 1 σi 1 σi 1 σ i 1 σi σ α x i ij ij, = 1, 2 i i i =1 i = 2 j j =1 j = 2 j = 3 x 1 x 2 x ij = 2 k= 1 σij ij 1 σij 1 σij 1 σ ij σij αijk xijk, i = 1,2, j = 1,2,3 k k =1 k = 2 ρ z z z = z( 1+ ρ) 1 p ijk p 1 ij p 11 i pi 21 i p 31 s pij 2 p = R ( s ) j = 2, 3 ij1 ij ij ij ij 6
sij ( 1) si 2 i2 = xi21 / xi11, 1 s 3 i s s x x x /( s x ) i3 = i31 / i21, 1 = i3 i2, 1 i11, 2 E 5 1 = 1 (1+ r) ( c + E ) W + Transfer r W Transfer z 7
z z Welfare = z base W pco 2 2 base CO p EXT EXT + ( MCPF 1) TAX CT 10 z base z p p EXT CO 2 CO 2 EXT MCPF Marginal Cos of Public Funds TAX CT 8
1 100 58.56 / 48.6 5.2 4.76 2.04 0.215 8.4km/ 1.5 6.6 / 9.9 / 1 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 1 3000 30.2 21.4 101.4 136.2 889.2 1 2 30.2 21.4 101.4 76.2 229.2 1500 30.2 21.4 75.0 83.4 510.0 1 2 30.2 21.4 75.0 53.4 180.0 (1) 300 150 3 1.5 2 1.5 1 76.2 53.4 10 5 5 (3) 21.4 (4) 101.4 75.0 (5) 30.2 3 p = R ( s ) = A + logninv( s,ì,sd ), i = 1,2, j = 2, 3 11 ij 1 ij ij ij ij ij ij Aij logninv( sij,ì ij,sdij ) 9
µ SD s s ij ij ij µ ij SDij s logninv( s,ì,sd ) 30.2 ij ij ij 2 3 ij ij 3 µ ij 2 0.22 2.06 1.27 9.27 SDij 2.15 6.90 3.09 8.12 Aij 199.0 199.0 149.8 149.8 31994 1998 1999 1 2 1 2 7,514 4,752 573 93.1% 57.8% 11,635 11,825 4,436 75.5% 23.5% σ α 2 2 σ 0.3 z 10
σ x 1.1 σ 1.5 σ 3 1 2 σ 0.12 σ 2 j 0.16 0.19 Goodwin (1992)Oum e.al (1992) (2000) (1999) 0.110.23 1 j α 2 1/ σij ijk = pijkxijk k= 1 α 3 1/ σ i ij = pij x ij j= 1 p p σij 1/ σ ij ijkx ijk 1/ σi ij xij σ i 12 13 α α x c α 2 1/ σ x i = pi xi i= 1 p i x 1/ σ x i σ x 1/ σ ( z 1/ σ ( z 1/ σ p x p x p c ) z σ + z x x c 14 = 15 1/ σ ( z 1/ σ ( z 1/ σ p c p x p c ) z σ z c x + c = 16 1989 (1) (2) 1995 1999 (3) 1999 (2) 11
(4) 4 41999 1 2 6,098 5,597 3,911 10,241 7,816 2,255 1.2 1 11.4 / 9.5 / 15 16 1999 14 r 0.2 4 ρ 0.05 1 W 997,971.6 NOx SPM CO CO 2 CO 2 12
CO 2 CO 2 1 643.3 (1) (2) 1999 2010 234 /C INFRAS/IWW1995 2025 1990 25 CO 184ECU/C 1995 34,480 /C Hohmeyer and Garner1992 1,467ECU/C1995 274,239 /C Parry and Small2001 Tol e al.2000 2001 5 /C 2000 1 152 1 100 27 3 3 /C 100 27 5 5 Tol e al.2000 50/C 3 /C 13
5CO 2 /C Bruce e al.1996 760 18,848 ECMT1998 304 1,520 Nordhaus1994 106.4 638.4 Parry and Small2001 106.4 760 6,080 2001 850 34,408 274,329 5,000 30,000 50,000 SPM, NO X SPM NO X CO 2 SPM NO X km 1 6 SPM, NO X /km ECMT (1998) 1.1 US FHA (2000) 1.1 1.2 Mayeres&Proos (2001) 1.4 McCubbin and Delucchi1999 1.3 17.7 Quine1997 0.35 2.6 Small and Kazimi (1995) 1.3 3.1 11.3 (2001) 1.0 17.0 Parry and Small (2001) 0.4 1.9 9.5 (2001) 2 1.1 1.8 2.6 1.0 1.5 10.0 1 2 SPM 14
2001 100 50 20 Federal Highway Cos Allocaion Sudy (US FHA (1997)) 60 30 90 Mayeres and Proos2001 US FHA (1997) 10 (2000) 52km/h 30km/h 20km/h 7 3 2 1 7 /km Delucchi1997 2.3 US FHA (1997) 0.7 7.3 Mayeres and Proos2001 5.5 31.1 Newbery1990 9.4 11.3 2001 18.0 36.0 Parry and Small2001 1.4 3.3 8.4 2.8 6.6 14.1 2001 2.9 7.3 14.6 4.2 7.0 15.0 8 15
1.0 /km 2.5 /km 7.0 8 /km Mayeres and Proos2001 4.1 Newbery1988 1.0 4.4 Delucchi1997 0.9 7.8 US FHA (1997) 0. 9 1.1 Parry and Small2001 1.1 2.8 7.0 0.9 2.3 5.6 2001 7.1 7.1 7.1 1.0 2.5 7.0 Parry & Small 9 1 1.05 9 SPM,NOx C km 5 6.6 5 4.2 1.0 30 9.9 5 7.0 2.5 50 66.0 5 15.0 7.0 9 34 58.56 / 9.5 /km 62.7 / 96.7 / 30 / 16
10 / /km / / / 3.2 6.6 4.76 14.6 4.2 1.0 5.2 48.92 150 75 0 0 19.3 9.9 4.76 34.0 7.0 2.5 9.5 96.70 150 75 0 0 32.2 66.0 4.76 102.9 15.0 7.0 22.0 248.10 150 75 0 0 58.56 0.0 58.56 300 150 76.2 53.4 CO 11 1999 45.8 1989 3 0 17
11 12.8 18.7 45.8% 146.3 213.4 45.8% 11.4 11.4 0.1% 27.9 24.5-12.3% 265.0 232.4-12.3% 9.5 9.5 0.0% 31.5 35.9 14.0% CO 1 MCPF = 1 18
4 58.56 / 10 CO 2 2 41 418 / CO 2 129 / 66 / 618 40 4 5 6 CO 2 150 / CO 2 0.3 3 2 6 3.4 1km 3 2 19
5 5 0 6 7 40 / CO2 5 20
370 / 7 8 CO Welfare (1) CO 2 (2) CO 2 (3) CO 2 10 / (4) CO 2 40 / CO 2 5 12 5.5 0.67 0.07 21
2.3 8CO 2 40 30 20 10 0 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% -10-20 -30 12 CO 2 CO 2 10 /1.7% -61.8 12.9 6.6 41.8 4.7 4.1 40 /4.8% -126.4 33.5 17.2 108.9 3.8 37.1 40% 0.3% 1.2 2.8 1.4 9.1 0.6 15.1 200% 0.3% 1.4 2.6 1.3 8.4 0.3 14.0 10 9 89CO 1011 22
9 CO 9CO 2 10 8 6 4 2 0-20.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% -4-6 -8-10 10 150 6 16.6 125 520 11.6 Mayers and Proos (2001) MCPF =1.05 23
10CO2 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0.0% -100 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 11 10 60 11CO2 1.05 90 70 50 30 10-100.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 24
CO 2 3 (1) CO 2 (2) CO 2 (3) CO 2 25
Bruce. J. P., Lee, H. and Haies, E. F. eds.:climae Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climae Change, Cambridge Universiy Press, 1995. Delucchi, Mark A.: The Annualized Social Cos of Moor-Vehicle Use in he US, 1990-1991: Summary of Theory, Daa, Mehods, and Resuls, Repor #1, The Annualized Social Cos of Moor-Vehicle Use in he Unied Saes, based on 1990-1991 Daa, Repor UCD-ITS-RR-96-3(1), Insiue of Transporaion Sudies, Universiy of California, Davis, 1997. Denis, C. and G.J.Koopman.: EUCARS: A spaial equilibrium model of EUropean CAR emissions. (Version 3), European Comission, 1998. ECMT: Efficien Transpor for Europe: Policies for Inernalizaion of Exernal Coss. European Conference of Minisers of Transpor, Organizaion for Economic Cooperaion and Developmen, Paris, 1998. Goodwin, P.B.: A review of new demand elasiciies wih special reference o sho and long run effecs of price changes, Journal of Transpor Economics and Policy, Vol.27 (2), pp.155-169, 1992. INFRAS/IWW: Exernal Cos of Transpor, UIC, 1995. Kanemoo, Y., Hasuike, K. and Fujiwara, T.: Road Transpor and Environmenal Policies in Japan 2001, forhcoming. Koopman, G.J.: Policies o Reduce CO 2 emissions from Cars in Europe: A Parial Equilibrium Analysis, Journal of Transpor Economics and Policy, Vol.30, pp.53-70, 1995. Mayeres, I. and Proos, S.: Should diesel cars in Europe be discouraged?, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol.31, pp.453-470, 2001. McCubbin, Donald R., and Mark A. Delucchi.: The Healh Coss of Moor-Vehicle-Relaed Air Polluion, Journal of Transpor Economics and Policy, Vol.33, pp.253-286, 1999. 26
Newbery, David M.: Road User Charges in Briain, Economic Journal Vol.98, pp.161-176, 1988 Newbery, David M.: Pricing and Congesion: Economic Principles Relevan o Pricing Roads, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol.6 No.2, pp.22-38, 1990. Nordhaus, William D.: Managing he Global Commons: The Economics of Climae Change, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1994. Oum, T.H., W. G. Waers and J. S. Yong.: Conceps of price elasiciies of ranspor demand and recen empirical esimaes, Journal of Transpor Economics and Policy, Vol.26, pp.139-154, 1992. Parry, Ian W.H., and Small, Kenneh A.: Does Briain or The Unied Saes Have he Righ Gasoline Tax?, UCI Deparmen of Economics Working Papers No.01-02-02, 2001. Proos, S. and K. Van Dender.: The Welfare Impacs of Alernaive Policies o Address Amospheric Polluion in Urban Road Transpor, Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol.31, pp.383-411, 2001. Quine, Emile.: Full Social Cos of Transporaion in Europe, The Full Coss and Benefis of Transporaion, David L. Greene, Donald W. Jones, and Mark A. Delucchi.eds., Springer-Verlag, pp.69-111, 1997. Small, Kenneh A., and Camilla Kazimi.: On he Coss of Air Polluion from Moor Vehicles, Journal of Transpor Economics and Policy, Vol.29, pp.7-32, 1995. Tol, Richard S.J., Samuel Fankhauser, Richard Richels and J.Smih.: How much Damage will Climae Change Do? Recen Esimaes, World Economics, 1, pp.179-206, 2000. US FHWA: 1997 Federal Highway Cos Allocaion Sudy Final Repor. US Federal Highway Adminisraion, Deparmen of Transporaion, Washingon, D.C., 1997. US FHWA: Addendum o he 1997 Federal Highway Cos Allocaion Sudy Final Repor. US Federal Highway Adminisraion, Deparmen of Transporaion, Washingon, D.C., 2000., 2000. 1999 2001.,, Vol.2 No.1, pp.2-13, 1999. 2000 2000. 27
, Vol.4 No.2, pp.19-30, 2001. 2001. 3 pp.249-2791999.,, Vol.1 No.1, pp.39-53, 1998. 28
Welfare evaluaion of ax policies o reduce CO 2 emissions by road ransporaion Toru Fujiwara, Kasuhio Hasuike, and Yoshiugu Kanemoo In his paper, we repor our simulaion resuls on he evaluaion of various policy measures aimed a reducing CO 2 emissions by auomobiles. Our main resuls are as follows. (1) Revenue neural changes in ownership axes and acquisiion axes have very small effecs on CO 2 emission. (2) Raising he fuel ax is more effecive in reducing CO 2 emission. (3) Combining an increase in he fuel ax wih a reducion in he ownership ax subsanially reduces CO 2 emission and, a he same ime, yields higher social benefis han oher opions. 29