Search

Equity, efficiency and effectiveness are three key criteria use to assess environmental policy instruments. Part 1 of this survey shows that, in terms of equity, Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) – a widely discussed personal carbon trading (PCT) scheme - cannot be differentiated from Cap and Dividend (C&D) or Cap and Share (C&S). Hence, Part 2 explores whether they can be differentiated in terms of efficiency and/or effectiveness. The paper reviews two studies that compare the efficiency of TEQs and C&D. Whilst their estimates of the costs and abatement potential of TEQs differ, neither study considers that there is a case, on efficiency grounds, for its implementation. The paper goes on to sketch two arguments for the implementation of PCT that might, nevertheless, be made on efficiency grounds and one – relating to public acceptability – that might be made on effectiveness grounds. Exploring the various public surveys conducted on the acceptability of PCT, the paper concludes that support for PCT is not obviously greater than for alternative instruments and notes a methodological limitation in the work reviewed. The paper concludes that, to date, the case against implementation of PCT is stronger than the case for. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In recent years, there has been considerable discussion within UK climate policy circles regarding the appropriateness of personal carbon trading as an instrument for greenhouse gas emission reduction. This paper is the first in a two-part survey of personal carbon trading (PCT), the term used here to describe proposed (sub-)national greenhouse gas emission trading schemes under which at least some emissions rights are allocated to and surrendered by individuals. After introducing the various proposed PCT schemes, the paper compares, in terms of equity, the two most-discussed PCT schemes with two alternative emission trading schemes and a carbon tax. The papers' two key findings are as follows. First, there are strong arguments that the equal per capita allocation proposed under some instruments is not completely fair. Second, the five instruments compared can be equivalent in terms of their equity. Along with equity, efficiency and effectiveness make up three key criteria for comparing environmental policy instruments. As PCT has no advantage in terms of equity, the paper concludes that any case for PCT will depend on it having advantages in terms of efficiency and/or effectiveness. Whether PCT has such advantages is explored in Part 2. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Atmospheric nitrogen pollution has severe impacts on biodiversity, but approaches to value them are limited. This paper develops a spatially explicit methodology to value the benefits from improvements in biodiversity resulting from current policy initiatives to reduce nitrogen emissions. Using the UK as a case study, we quantify nitrogen impacts on plant diversity in four habitats: heathland, acid grassland, dunes and bogs, at fine spatial resolution. Focusing on non-use values for biodiversity we apply value-transfer based on household's willingness to pay to avoid changes in plant species richness, and calculate the benefit of projected emission declines of 37% for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) and 6% for ammonia (NH 3 ) over the scenario period 2007–2020. The annualised benefit resulting from these pollutant declines is £32.7 m (£4.4 m to £109.7 m, 95% Confidence Interval), with the greatest benefit accruing from heathland and acid grassland due to their large area. We also calculate damage costs per unit of NO 2 and NH 3 emitted, to quantify some of the environmental impacts of air pollution for use alongside damage costs for human health in policy appraisal. The benefit is £103 (£33 to £237) per tonne of NO 2 saved, and £414 (£139 to £1022) per tonne of NH 3 saved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides a detailed review of the basis and prospects for United Kingdom (UK) proposals for the most ambitious mainstream social, economic, and environmental policy program of the 21st century: the Green New Deal (GND), providing critical reflection for its implementation at a local or regional level. Through a review of academic, policy and book publications we examine the key proposed features of a UK GND, identifying five core elements: financial reforms; green infrastructure investment; financing the GND; ownership structures; and economic, social and climate justice. We subsequently review these policy areas through the lens of multi-level governance (MLG) to understand what scales of policy action are required for these aims to be achieved. We find that, whilst core elements of a UK GND, such as reforms to the financial system, and expansionary fiscal and monetary policy require policy change at national and supra-national level, the majority of GND investments require implementation at the local level. We suggest that, in the context of contemporary UK MLG, there are challenges for fully funding and delivering a GND without a national programme, while highlighting emerging options for coordinating and implementing a GND by local government actors, in the absence of national support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we adopt a recent OECD framework and examine the role of external policy tools and internal firm specific factors for stimulating three different types of eco-innovations that range on a spectrum of lower to higher technological and environmental impacts: End-of-Pipeline Pollution Control Technologies, Integrated Cleaner Production Technologies and Environmental R&D. Using a novel firm-level dataset from a DEFRA survey, we estimate a Tobit model, which provides empirical evidence showing that these eco-innovations are motivated by different external policy tools and internal firm specific factors. Our findings indicate that End of Pipeline Technologies and Integrated Cleaner Production Technologies are mainly driven by equipment upgrade motives with a view of improving efficiency while environmental regulations are effective in stimulating the End-of-Pipeline technologies and Environmental R&D. Interestingly, alongside government induced regulations, we find that market factors, mainly motivated by cost savings, are effective in driving Environmental R&D. Finally, ISO14001 certification is effective in strengthening the positive impact of environmental management systems on both End-of-Pipeline technologies and Environmental R&D while CSR policies have no significant impact on motivating any of the eco-innovations. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The UK Climate Change Bill proposes to establish legally binding targets for a 60% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. This paper discusses the challenges posed by measuring progress towards this target. It takes as a premise that the conventional production-based accounting framework, enshrined in the UNFCCC emissions accounting guidelines, is inappropriate for this task because it fails to account for the carbon ‘traded’ across the UK national boundary. Accordingly, it sets out a consumption-based accounting framework – using a two-region Environmental Input–Output (EIO) model – which could in principle measure progress in reducing the emissions attributable to final consumers in the UK. It illustrates the use of this framework to measure the reduction in carbon dioxide achieved by the UK between 1990 (the Kyoto base year) and the year 2004 and compares this against the production perspective. The results indicate that any progress towards the UK''s carbon reduction targets (visible under a production perspective) disappears completely when viewed from a consumption perspective. But the robustness of this conclusion depends critically on the accuracy of underlying economic and environmental datasets as well as specific assumptions concerning imports. By analysing the consistency of UK Input–Output data, we conclude that EIO is still some way from being able to answer the critical question of the carbon trade balance for the UK. In these circumstances, measuring real progress towards carbon reduction in the UK remains elusive. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]