碳税比碳交易更适合发展中国家吗?  

Is Carbon Tax Better than Carbon Trading for the Developing Country?

作　　者：胡艺[1] 魏小燕 沈铭辉[3] Hu Yi;Wei Xiao-yan;Shen Ming-hui

机构地区：[1]武汉大学经济发展研究中心和美国加拿大经济研究所,武汉430072 [2]武汉大学经济与管理学院,武汉430072 [3]中国社会科学院亚太与全球战略研究院,北京100007

出　　处：《亚太经济》2020年第4期29-38,M0004,共11页Asia-Pacific Economic Review

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目“环境规制与中国式产能过剩的防治:基于空间经济理论与实证方法的研究”(批准号:71873097);湖北省软科学项目“《湖北省自主创新条例》实施效果评估”(批准号:2017ADC092);教育部国别与区域研究项目“美国人工智能战略设计研究”(批准号:2019GBQY118)。

摘　　要：基于95个国家1999-2014年的面板数据,实证分析了碳税和碳排放交易制度在发达国家和发展中国家的有效性和适应性。结果表明:碳税和碳排放交易都能有效减少各类国家的碳排放,但两者不存在交互强化效应;相比于发达国家,碳税在减少发展中国家的碳排放上更有效,碳排放交易在两类国家间的效果无差异;发展中国家低碳技术和能源结构升级,更有利于碳税而非碳排放交易下的减排;国际碳减排合作的整体有效性取决于强制约束力,但发展中国家参与能显著降低碳排放。因此,碳税可作为发展中国家优先考虑的碳减排制度,发展中国家应多渠道升级低碳技术水平和能源结构,全员参与的《巴黎协定》重在落实强制性约束。Based on the panel data of 95 countries from 1999 to 2014,this paper focuses on the effectiveness and applicability of carbon tax and carbon trading between developed country and developing country.The results show that:(1)Both carbon tax and carbon trading can effectively reduce carbon emission in all countries,but there is no interaction strengthening effect between the two systems.(2)Compared with the developed country,carbon tax is more effective for carbon emission reduction in developing country.(3)The impact of low-carbon technology and energy structure upgrading for developing country under carbon tax is greater than under carbon trading.(4)The effectiveness of international cooperation is determined by mandatory binding force.The participation of developing country is effective to their emission reduction.This paper proposes that carbon tax should be the priority option for developing country;the developing countries should promote their low-carbon technology and energy structure through multi-channels;the paris agreement should focus on the mandatory provisions.

关 键 词：碳税 碳排放交易 国际减排合作 发展中国家 《巴黎协定》 

分 类 号：F113[经济管理—国际贸易]