碳强度的双重红利:环境质量改善与经济持续增长  

Double Dividend of Carbon Intensity: Environmental Quality Improvement and Sustainable Economic Growth

作　　者：范庆泉[1] 周县华[2] 刘净然 

机构地区：[1]清华大学经济管理学院，北京 100084 [2]中央财经大学中国精算研究院，北京 100081 [3]中国民航大学外国语学院，天津 300300

出　　处：《中国人口·资源与环境》2015年第6期62-71,共10页China Population,Resources and Environment

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目"外资股东主导下的股利分配行为:降低代理成本还是寻找提款机?"(编号:71102125);国家自然科学基金项目"中国高新技术产业R&D投入对技术创新的内在驱动机制研究:结构变化;两面性与政策效应"(编号:71303035);环境保护部环境规划院委托项目"环境公共治理模式多主体协同机制研究"(编号:2014A136)

摘　　要：本文构建了一个由代表性家庭、政府和八个不同行业组成的一般均衡模型,同时在模型中嵌入了碳强度、碳交易两种不同的环境政策工具,并基于2007年我国投入产出表数据进行校准。本文通过数值分析指出我国约束全行业的碳减排政策对福利损失的边际影响最小,约束重点行业的碳减排政策对实际GDP的影响存在倒"U"型关系,在碳强度目标约束不高于17%时,碳强度政策对社会福利的损失影响要低于碳交易政策;在碳强度目标约束不高于21%时,约束重点行业的碳减排政策对实际GDP的边际损失影响要低于约束全行业的政策。我国的碳减排政策在当前碳强度约束目标下实现了环境质量改善和经济持续增长的双重红利,该结论支持了环境Porter假说。双重红利产生的原因是由于碳减排政策使得资源要素使用成本上升,进而提高了劳动等低碳要素需求,使得行业之间生产要素重新配置,在一定情况下实现了经济增长和环境改善。进一步,本文给出了环境规制政策的设计方案,根据边际减排相等以实现总减排成本最小化的原理,给出了约束全行业减排的环境政策下各行业碳强度的任务分解,通过模拟计算各行业的边际减排成本,可以为政府根据行业维度制定更为科学、合理的减排方案提供理论和实践支持。此外,本文还估计了产业需求变动、行业最终消费结构变动、行业全要素生产率变动、行业需求中间投入品替代弹性技术变动等各种经济发展方式的变化对碳排放量和碳强度的边际影响,深入分析和理解经济发展方式与碳强度变化之间的内在联系,有利于识别经济系统中相互关联的各种因素如何对碳强度的政策目标产生影响。本文的研究指出我国应大力提高各项中间投入品的单位碳排放节能技术水平,这是降低碳排放强度最直接的、最有力的政策措施。政府应进一步加�This paper establishes an equilibrium model including representative households, government and eight industries, and two such different environmental policy tools as carbon intensity and carbon cap were added into the model. As for the calibrations of the model parameters, the level of sectoral disaggregation was set to M = 8 based on the 2007 Input-output of China. The paper studied that the environmental policy of setting carbon intensity target for all industries exerted least marginal impacts on welfare loss with the same carbon intensity target through numerical analysis, the impact of the China＇ s actual environmental policy imposed on major high- emission industries on the real GDP can even explained in an inverted U-shaped curve. We found that the infcuence of the carbon intensity policy is lower than that of the carbon cap policy in terms of welfare loss, if the declining rate of carbon intensity target is lower than 17%, and the marginal loss of the real GDP caused by the China＇ s actual environmental policy is lower than that of the environmental policy of setting carbon intensity target for all industries with less than 21% of carbon intensity target. The paper pointed out that the carbon intensity policy imposed on major high-emission industries achieved double dividend of environmental quality improvement and sustainable economic growth under the condition of proper constraint target. This result supported environmental Porter hypothesis. The reason of double dividend is that environmental governance policy leads to rising price of resources and demand of labors, which result in an effective redistribution of production factors among industries and sustainable economic growth. Furthermore, the paper designed the scheme of China＇ s environmental governance policies and gave the carbon intensity policy＇ s assignment by dividing the targets among industries based on the principle of equal marginal emission reduction leading to the minimum of total cost of emission reduction. The paper offered

关 键 词：碳强度 产业结构 经济增长 环境质量 

分 类 号：F124[经济管理—世界经济]