МЕЖСТРАНОВЫЕ ЭМПИРИЧЕСКИЕ ДАННЫЕ О МАКРОЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИХ ПОСЛЕДСТВИЯХ ЦЕНООБРАЗОВАНИЯ НА УГЛЕРОД: МЕТА-АНАЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ ОБЗОР С МОДЕЛИРОВАНИЕМ ДЛЯ РОССИИ
Empirical Studies on GDP Effects of Carbon Pricing
LP = local projections; SVAR = structural vector autoregression; VAR = vector autoregression; DiD = difference-in-differences; CGE = computable general equilibrium. Significance: *** p < 0,01, ** p < 0,05, n.s. = not statistically significant, Simul. = simulation result. Metcalf and Stock [3] is a preliminary version; [2] is the full publication using the same data and method. Firm-level studies by Dechezleprêtre et al. [14] and Colmer et al. [15], and the emissions-focused panel by Best et al. [16], are discussed in the text as complementary evidence
Study | Method | Sample | Type | Revenue recycling | GDP effect | Signif. |
Metcalf, Stock (2020, 2023) | Panel LP | 31 EU+ countries, 1985–2017 | Tax | Various | +0,3 to +0,5 pp growth | n.s. |
Känzig (2023) | SVAR | EU ETS, monthly | ETS | Limited | -0,3% GDP | *** |
Känzig, Konradt (2024) | SVAR + LP | EU countries | Both | Differential | ETS: decline; Tax: modest | ** (ETS) |
Bernard, Kichian (2021) | VAR | British Columbia, 2008–2017 | Tax | Full (income tax cuts) | ≈0 | n.s. |
Yamazaki (2017, 2022) | DiD | BC manufacturing | Tax | Full (income and corporate tax cuts) | -0,15% output; +0,06% TFP net | ** |
Goulder, Hafstead (2013, 2018) | E3 CGE | United States | Tax | Scenarios | -0,24% to -0,56% | Simul. |
Makarov et al. (2020) | EPPA CGE | Russia (global policies) | Both | N/A | -0,5 pp growth/yr | Simul. |
Orlov, Grethe (2012) | STAGE CGE | Russia (domestic tax) | Tax | Scenarios | -0,63% to positive | Simul. |