Search

The sequential rollout of diverse climate policies by national and local governing bodies has sparked a series of concerns regarding their efficacy and long-term impact. These policies function either as constraints or incentives within the carbon market eco-trading system. This study aims to bridge gaps in quantitative analysis of climate policy interactions by employing the Stackelberg game model to explore various policy mix and their impacts on both national and regional conditions. It explored the effects of seven types of policy packages (including reduction targets, free allowance allocations, guideline prices, and their mixed scenarios) on regional and national economic growth and decarbonization targets. Moreover, fine-grained example analyses based on China's carbon markets were used to capture these win-win signals. The results show that: (1) when accounting for regional disparities, a waterbed effect emerges, implying that no scenario can simultaneously achieve both accelerated net profit growth and significant emission reductions across all regions. (2) Interactions among climate policies may yield strengthening, overlapping, or weakening effects compared to the business- as -usual scenario. However, it is crucial to note that these effects typically exhibit an inverse relationship between net profit growth and emission reductions. (3) Carbon trading prices act as public signals that assist policymakers in determining the Stackelberg-Nash equilibrium points to pursue optimized net profits under emission constraints. Hence, policymakers are encouraged to embrace comprehensive, sustainable solutions, ensuring ongoing monitoring and timely policy adaptations that strike a balance between economic growth and emission reduction regarding regional disparities. • Climate policies interact, causing strengthening, overlapping, or weakening effects. • Carbon trading prices play as public signals in the process behind the game. • Total net profit growth entails emission increases or exacerbating regional inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Emission offshoring does not account for emission reductions in advanced economies. • Most advanced economies onshore more carbon emissions than they offshore emissions. • The USA net offshores emissions while China net onshores emissions. • Per-capita income does not predict which country specializes in green products. International trade and emission offshoring can reduce a country's domestic carbon dioxide emissions, helping it to reach emission reduction targets set under the prevailing territorial climate policy frameworks. We ask what is the net contribution of trade to national production-based emissions. Existing metrics (consumption-based emissions and the technology-adjusted balance of emissions embodied in trade) do not answer this question. Based on global multi-regional input-output tables and the domestic technology assumption, we calculate net emission onshoring as the difference between the emissions embodied in gross exports (onshoring) and the emissions avoided by gross imports (offshoring) for 43 countries between 2000–2014. We find that the USA offshores emissions and China onshores emissions; the aggregate trade balance explains this result while the trade composition plays a negligible role in either country. In general there is no cross-country relationship between net offshoring and per-capita income, and neither one between trade specialization in emission-intensive products and per-capita income. The developed countries' absolute decoupling of economic growth and production-based emissions since 2000 is "genuine" in the sense that it reflects domestic economic developments and is not owed to emission offshoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of command-and-control target policies for climate governance is crucial in achieving China's "dual carbon" goals. We investigate the impact of multi-target policy on county-level carbon emissions, using the generalized difference-in-differences model for the gradual implementation at different phases of multiple policies. We find that the Carbon Intensity Reduction Target (CIRT) and Total Energy Consumption Target (TECT) policies promote carbon reduction, while the Energy Intensity Reduction Target (EIRT) policy has less reliable outcomes. In the eastern and central regions, the initial phase of carbon reduction is primarily propelled by the EIRT policy, subsequently transitioning to the dominant influence of the CIRT policy. In the later phase, carbon reduction in the eastern region is predominantly attributed to the CIRT policy, whereas in the central region, it results from the combined effects of the EIRT, CIRT, and TECT policies. In the western region, early policies have an insignificant impact on carbon reduction, and the later-phase effects shift from being primarily influenced by the EIRT to being predominantly influenced by the CIRT. Additionally, neglecting the impact of other policies with similar targets during the same period may lead to overestimation of the effects of EIRT and TECT and underestimation of the effect of CIRT. • Command-and-control target policies are crucial for China's "dual carbon" goals. • The effectiveness of climate policies varies by timing and region. • Carbon intensity reduction targets consistently reduce emissions. • Combining multiple policies effectively cuts carbon emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]