Search

This study investigates the impacts of carbon pricing policies on firms' greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We include two carbon pricing policies: carbon tax and emission trading scheme (ETS) at national and sub-national (province) levels, measured as policy existence (binary variable) and carbon price (continuous variable). Firms' GHG emissions are measured as total emissions and emission intensity. Using unique recent firm-level data from 2010 to 2021 from three East Asia countries (Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the People's Republic of China (PRC)), we obtain the following key findings. First, the national carbon pricing policy significantly reduced firms' GHG emissions and GHG emission intensity in Japan and the ROK. The greater the carbon price, the greater the impact. Second, the subnational carbon pricing policies implemented in two provinces of Japan (Saitama and Tokyo) decreased firms' GHG emissions. Third, heavy industry sectors such as energy, utilities, and industrials experienced a substantial decrease in GHG emission intensity due to the carbon pricing policy. Finally, our main results are robust to different model specifications and various measures of firms' GHG emissions. Although literature studying the ex-post impact of carbon pricing on emissions at country and sector-level is abundant, this paper contributes to the existing literature providing empirical evidence of the impact of carbon pricing policies on firms' emissions using firm-level data, which is highly limited especially in Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To address greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping, the International Maritime Organization has adopted technical and operational measures, and discussed the possibility of adopting market-based measures. China, Japan and South Korea are major shipbuilding nations in the world, and have differing responses towards the IMO's regulatory initiatives. This paper conducts a comparative assessment of these three countries' positions on regulatory principles of the greenhouse gas issue, and concludes that their differentiated perspectives on this matter reflect their different regulatory interests. It is significant to take their differentiated interests into account in the developing regulatory regime to avoid disproportionate burdens being placed on certain countries, in particular developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]