Transaction costs and the assessment of greenhouse policies in the transport energy sector (original) (raw)
Related papers
Transaction costs of alternative greenhouse gas policies in the Australian transport energy sector
2013
This study employs a comparative analysis of the transaction costs of alternative policy instruments. The institutional approach to the allocation of resources is emerging to supplement traditional analyses of market and government failures. The causes of these failures are many, but often point to high transaction costs that result largely from institutional impediments. Effective institutions can help reduce transaction costs through more effective signals and incentives, including information generation, to help markets function more efficiently and policies to be delivered more successfully. The study, which contributes to transaction costs measurement, finds that the magnitudes and types of transaction costs associated with setting up and implementing three greenhouse gas reduction policy programs in Australia are substantial and different. The estimated transaction costs of the Tradable Permit and Fee System are relatively high compared to those of the mandatory Fuel Label Program and the voluntary Fuel Efficiency Program, which supports the view that market-based policies can also be costly to deliver. Notwithstanding, transaction costs have frequently been ignored in cost-benefit analyses. It is concluded that transaction costs need to be considered alongside other costs and benefits in the assessment of policies.
The cost-effectiveness of carbon abatement in the transport sector
Transport Activists Roundtable Report, 2008
The abatement of greenhouse gas emissions in order to avert the most serious consequences of climate change will not be cheap. However, neither will adaptation to the effects of a changing and volatile global climate. Sir Nicholas Stern reviewed precisely this issue and concluded that, by incurring costs now to avoid serious and more expensive future consequences, money spent on mitigation could be a wise investment. However, for this to make the best economic sense, the costs of abatement should not exceed the value of the damage of that carbon over its lifetime - the social cost of carbon (SCC). The effect of this debate has been to shine an intense spotlight on the costs of carbon reduction. In recent years, many global and UK based studies have compared sectors of the economy and individual policy instruments according to their potential to save carbon and the costs this would incur. The conclusions to these analyses are remarkably consistent: carbon abatement will be more expensively achieved in transport than other sectors such as residential, industry or energy supply. This paper examines the background and robustness of this assertion. The discussion can be distilled into three crucial issues which, depending on how they are handled in any analysis, together dictate whether or not transport measures will be deemed a more or less cost-effective route to carbon reduction. In short, these are the assumptions about future costs and level of travel demand, the methods applied to compare policies for cost-effectiveness and the evidence base used in relation to different types and combinations of policy instrument.
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 1998
AbstractÐMany challenges are associated with the increasing level of energy consumption and the environmental damage caused. At the local level, there is noise and air pollution while at the global level there are problems associated with acid rain, ozone layer depletion and the greenhouse eects. The transport sector is a major contributor in both cases. The use of appropriate decision-making tools is required to assist in assessing alternative transport policies. One such tool is the Total Emissions Model for Integrated Systems (TEMIS) program, developed at the Institute of Applied Ecology, Darmstadt. The transport sector initially only received cursory treatment in TEMIS. In particular, the modelling of transport end-use processes was insensitive to trac management measures and consequently insensitive to the eects of changes in trac on fuel consumption and emissions. An enhanced version of TEMIS has subsequently been used to examine dierent transport scenarios in order to improve future fuel economy. This paper explores alternative transport policy scenarios in the context of air emissions (including greenhouse gases) looking at two independent case-studies in the city of Newcastle upon Tyne (U.K.). First, the eects of improvements in fuel emissions in the city of Newcastle upon Tyne; second, the eects of dierent access management strategies for the proposed Inner Distributor Road. #
In the Transport Energy Sector
2004
These papers present the provisional findings of research projects being undertaken within the Environmental Management and Development Programme by staff, students and visiting fellows. The views and interpretations expressed in these papers are those of the author(s).
Discussion: 1500076: Re-thinking UK transport emissions getting to the 2050 targets
2017
specialisation, distribution and consumption. It is essential for geographical and social inclusion, spreading prosperity and encouraging development. By promoting opportunities, transport allows a region to retain its young people who otherwise might move to a big city, draining the countryside of its vitality. Thus the examination of costs and benefits of transport is a complex subject, with many parameters other than just greenhouse gas emissions affecting the wisest choice for a nation (ICE, 2011). If the underlying vision of government is for continuing national prosperity and growth, it has to ensure that the national and international transport system is fit for purpose, providing connectivity that is efficient, socially enhancing and environmentally positive.
A methodological framework for the economic evaluation of CO2emissions from transport
Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2013
As the main cause of the global warming, CO 2 emissions are a relevant externality in the transport sector. However, feasibility assessments do not always take these effects into adequate account, because a number of scientific and economic uncertainties make it difficult to determine a reliable estimate for a unitary CO 2 cost. This paper first analyses the methods generally used to determine the cost of CO 2 emissions, showing that market-based prices are not always suitable for this aim. Avoidance and damage cost methods are then thoroughly discussed, evaluating their pros and cons, including an extensive review of previous studies of methods for comparing costs. To determine the most reliable values, a method based on both avoidance and damage costs is proposed here. This method is then applied to the case study of the Brenner Base Tunnel, comparing the outcomes of three different scenarios: 'minimum' suggests the maintenance of the 'do-nothing' option (no tunnel realisation), whereas 'trend' and 'consensus' both imply the construction of the tunnel with different political choices, namely, a complete market liberalisation in trend and sustainable interventions in consensus. Results up to 2035 reveal that, in comparison with the do-nothing option, the enlightened transport policy shown in consensus could bring about a CO 2 economic saving of up to around €331m for the community, whereas a simple liberalisation (trend) increases the costs derived from global warming by about €228m.