[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v38y2021i5p596-630.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate and transportation policy sequencing in California and Quebec

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Purdon
  • Julie Witcover
  • Colin Murphy
  • Sonya Ziaja
  • Mark Winfield
  • Genevieve Giuliano
  • Charles Séguin
  • Colleen Kaiser
  • Jacques Papy
  • Lewis Fulton
Abstract
We compare flexible low‐carbon regulations in the transportation sector and their interaction and sequencing with greenhouse gas emissions trading systems in California and Quebec. As momentum builds for greater climate action, it is necessary to better understand how carbon markets and other low‐carbon transportation policies influence one another. First, we demonstrate that emissions trading between California and Quebec has been asymmetric, with linking having little influence on carbon prices from California's perspective but leading to a considerable cost reduction from the point of view of Quebec. Second, we present evidence that Quebec has replicated many of California's low‐carbon transportation policies that promote increased electric vehicle use, where Quebec has an advantage, while deferring to the Canadian federal government with regard to policies that incentivize the production of other low‐carbon transportation fuels. Third, we demonstrate that while the stringency of the policy mix of carbon pricing and flexible transportation regulations has increased over time in both jurisdictions, the stringency of flexible regulations has been more aggressively ratcheted up and is expected to continue to dominate. Overall, our findings suggest that the policy sequence observed in California and Quebec can be attributed to the political economy benefits that the selected instruments confer to governments seeking to move from the middle towards the bottom of the clean technology experience curve. We discuss a number of important research questions and associated hypotheses emanating from our findings, which provide the basis for more in‐depth studies involving a larger universe of cases and economic sectors. 我们比较了加利福尼亚州和魁北克省运输部门中灵活的低碳规制以及这些规制与温室气体排放交易系统的互动及排序。鉴于采取更多气候行动的趋势增加，有必要更好地理解碳市场及其他低碳运输政策如何相互影响。第一，我们证明，加利福尼亚州和魁北克省之间的排放交易一直是非对称的，这种交易联系在加利福尼亚州看来对碳价格几乎不存在影响，但从魁北克省看来却导致了大量的成本削减。第二，我们提出证据认为，魁北克省对加利福尼亚州的许多低碳运输政策加以复制，这些政策倡导多使用电子交通工具，这对魁北克省是有利的，同时魁北克省在其他低碳运输燃料生产的激励政策方面听从加拿大联邦政府。第三，我们证明，尽管碳定价和灵活运输规制这一政策组合的严格性在这两个地区都逐渐增加，但灵活规制的严格性一直增加地更为猛烈，并且预计会继续主导该趋势。整体而言，我们的研究发现暗示，加利福尼亚州和魁北克省的政策序列（policy sequence）能归因于政策工具对政府授予的政治经济利益，这些政府试图从清洁技术经验曲线的中部迈向底部。我们探讨了一系列从研究发现中得出的重要研究问题及相关假设，这为更深入地研究更多的案例和经济部门提供了基础。 Comparamos las regulaciones flexibles de bajas emisiones de carbono en el sector del transporte y su interacción y secuenciación con los sistemas de comercio de emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero en California y Quebec. A medida que aumenta el impulso para una mayor acción climática, es necesario comprender mejor cómo los mercados de carbono y otras políticas de transporte con bajas emisiones de carbono se influyen entre sí. Primero, demostramos que el comercio de emisiones entre California y Quebec ha sido asimétrico, teniendo la vinculación poca influencia en los precios del carbono desde la perspectiva de California, pero conduciendo a una considerable reducción de costos desde el punto de vista de Quebec. En segundo lugar, presentamos evidencia de que Quebec ha replicado muchas de las políticas de transporte bajas en carbono de California que promueven un mayor uso de vehículos eléctricos, donde Quebec tiene una ventaja, al tiempo que difiere al gobierno federal canadiense con respecto a las políticas que incentivan la producción de otros vehículos de bajo carbono. combustibles de transporte. En tercer lugar, demostramos que si bien la rigurosidad de la combinación de políticas de fijación de precios del carbono y regulaciones de transporte flexible ha aumentado con el tiempo en ambas jurisdicciones, la rigurosidad de las regulaciones flexibles se ha incrementado de manera más agresiva y se espera que continúe dominando. En general, nuestros hallazgos sugieren que la secuencia de políticas observada en California y Quebec puede atribuirse a los beneficios de economía política que los instrumentos seleccionados otorgan a los gobiernos que buscan moverse desde el centro hacia el final de la curva de experiencia de tecnología limpia. Discutimos una serie de preguntas de investigación importantes e hipótesis asociadas que emanan de nuestros hallazgos, que proporcionan la base para estudios más profundos que involucran un universo más amplio de casos y sectores económicos.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Purdon & Julie Witcover & Colin Murphy & Sonya Ziaja & Mark Winfield & Genevieve Giuliano & Charles Séguin & Colleen Kaiser & Jacques Papy & Lewis Fulton, 2021. "Climate and transportation policy sequencing in California and Quebec," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(5), pages 596-630, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:38:y:2021:i:5:p:596-630
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12440
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12440?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonn Axsen & Patrick Plötz & Michael Wolinetz, 2020. "Crafting strong, integrated policy mixes for deep CO2 mitigation in road transport," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(9), pages 809-818, September.
    2. Yang, Christopher & Yeh, Sonia & Zakerinia, Saleh & Ramea, Kalai & McCollum, David, 2015. "Achieving California's 80% greenhouse gas reduction target in 2050: Technology, policy and scenario analysis using CA-TIMES energy economic systems model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 118-130.
    3. Lori Bennear & Robert Stavins, 2007. "Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 111-129, May.
    4. Breetz, Hanna L., 2017. "Regulating carbon emissions from indirect land use change (ILUC): U.S. and California case studies," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 25-31.
    5. David Houle & Erick Lachapelle & Mark Purdon, 2015. "Comparative Politics of Sub-Federal Cap-and-Trade: Implementing the Western Climate Initiative," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 49-73, August.
    6. Hochstetler,Kathryn, 2020. "Political Economies of Energy Transition," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108843843, September.
    7. Breetz, Hanna & Mildenberger, Matto & Stokes, Leah, 2018. "The political logics of clean energy transitions," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 492-522, December.
    8. Severin Borenstein & James Bushnell & Frank A. Wolak & Matthew Zaragoza-Watkins, 2019. "Expecting the Unexpected: Emissions Uncertainty and Environmental Market Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(11), pages 3953-3977, November.
    9. Sharon Mascher, 2018. "Striving for equivalency across the Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Québec carbon pricing systems: the Pan-Canadian carbon pricing benchmark," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 1012-1027, September.
    10. Hunt Allcott & Christopher Knittel, 2019. "Are Consumers Poorly Informed about Fuel Economy? Evidence from Two Experiments," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 1-37, February.
    11. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    12. Fischer, Carolyn & Preonas, Louis, 2010. "Combining Policies for Renewable Energy: Is the Whole Less Than the Sum of Its Parts?," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(1), pages 51-92, June.
    13. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    14. Jorge Carrillo, 2004. "NAFTA: The Process of Regional Integration of Motor Vehicle Production," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Jorge Carrillo & Yannick Lung & Rob Tulder (ed.), Cars, Carriers of Regionalism?, chapter 7, pages 104-117, Palgrave Macmillan.
    15. Rodier, Caroline J., 2009. "A Review of the International Modeling Literature: Transit, Land Use, and Auto Pricing Strategies to Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled and Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2jh2m3ps, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    16. Jorge Carrillo & Yannick Lung & Rob Tulder (ed.), 2004. "Cars, Carriers of Regionalism?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-52385-2, March.
    17. David Klenert & Linus Mattauch & Emmanuel Combet & Ottmar Edenhofer & Cameron Hepburn & Ryan Rafaty & Nicholas Stern, 2018. "Making carbon pricing work for citizens," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(8), pages 669-677, August.
    18. Berck, Peter & Braennlund, Runar, 2010. "Green regulations in Califorina and Sweden," CUDARE Working Paper Series 1101, University of California at Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Policy.
    19. Michael Pahle & Dallas Burtraw & Christian Flachsland & Nina Kelsey & Eric Biber & Jonas Meckling & Ottmar Edenhofer & John Zysman, 2018. "Sequencing to ratchet up climate policy stringency," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 861-867, October.
    20. Thelen,Kathleen, 2004. "How Institutions Evolve," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521546744, September.
    21. Yannick Lung & Jorge Carrillo & Rob van Tulder, 2004. "Cars, Carriers of regionalism?," Post-Print hal-00248180, HAL.
    22. Thelen,Kathleen, 2004. "How Institutions Evolve," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521837682, September.
    23. Michaël Aklin & Matto Mildenberger, 2020. "Prisoners of the Wrong Dilemma: Why Distributive Conflict, Not Collective Action, Characterizes the Politics of Climate Change," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(4), pages 4-27, Autumn.
    24. Christoph Böhringer & Knut Rosendahl, 2010. "Green promotes the dirtiest: on the interaction between black and green quotas in energy markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 316-325, June.
    25. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10174 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Andrea Baranzini & Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh & Stefano Carattini & Richard B. Howarth & Emilio Padilla & Jordi Roca, 2017. "Carbon pricing in climate policy: seven reasons, complementary instruments, and political economy considerations," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), July.
    27. Gian-Claudia Sciara, 2017. "Metropolitan Transportation Planning: Lessons From the Past, Institutions for the Future," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(3), pages 262-276, July.
    28. Jonas Meckling & Thomas Sterner & Gernot Wagner, 2017. "Policy sequencing toward decarbonization," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(12), pages 918-922, December.
    29. Carolyn Fischer & Louis Preonas & Richard G. Newell, 2017. "Environmental and Technology Policy Options in the Electricity Sector: Are We Deploying Too Many?," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(4), pages 959-984.
    30. Matto Mildenberger, 2019. "Support for climate unilateralism," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(3), pages 187-188, March.
    31. Hanemann, W. Michael, 2007. "How California Came to Pass AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1vb0j4d6, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    32. Stokes, Leah C. & Breetz, Hanna L., 2018. "Politics in the U.S. energy transition: Case studies of solar, wind, biofuels and electric vehicles policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 76-86.
    33. Yeh, Sonia & Witcover, Julie & Lade, Gabriel E. & Sperling, Daniel, 2016. "A review of low carbon fuel policies: Principles, program status and future directions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 220-234.
    34. Lepitzki, Justin & Axsen, Jonn, 2018. "The role of a low carbon fuel standard in achieving long-term GHG reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 423-440.
    35. Berck, Peter & Braennlund, Runar, 2010. "Green regulations in Califorina and Sweden," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt78x4r0z6, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nils C. Bandelow & Johanna Hornung & Ilana Schröder & Colette S. Vogeler, 2021. "Decarbonization and climate change," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(6), pages 754-756, November.
    2. Axsen, Jonn & Wolinetz, Michael, 2023. "What does a low-carbon fuel standard contribute to a policy mix? An interdisciplinary review of evidence and research gaps," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 54-63.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & McCollum, David, 2022. "Which “second-best” climate policies are best? Simulating cost-effective policy mixes for passenger vehicles," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Axsen, Jonn & Wolinetz, Michael, 2023. "What does a low-carbon fuel standard contribute to a policy mix? An interdisciplinary review of evidence and research gaps," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 54-63.
    3. Axsen, Jonn & Wolinetz, Michael, 2021. "Taxes, tolls and ZEV zones for climate: Synthesizing insights on effectiveness, efficiency, equity, acceptability and implementation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    4. Fischer, Carolyn & Hübler, Michael & Schenker, Oliver, 2021. "More birds than stones – A framework for second-best energy and climate policy adjustments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    6. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Pigou pushes preferences: decarbonisation and endogenous values," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-16, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    7. Sebastian Levi & Christian Flachsland & Michael Jakob, 2020. "Political Economy Determinants of Carbon Pricing," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 128-156, May.
    8. Heleen L. Soest & Lara Aleluia Reis & Luiz Bernardo Baptista & Christoph Bertram & Jacques Després & Laurent Drouet & Michel Elzen & Panagiotis Fragkos & Oliver Fricko & Shinichiro Fujimori & Neil Gra, 2021. "Global roll-out of comprehensive policy measures may aid in bridging emissions gap," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Dugan, Anna & Mayer, Jakob & Thaller, Annina & Bachner, Gabriel & Steininger, Karl W., 2022. "Developing policy packages for low-carbon passenger transport: A mixed methods analysis of trade-offs and synergies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    10. Hoyle, Aaron & Peters, Jotham & Jaccard, Mark & Rhodes, Ekaterina, 2024. "Additional or accidental? Simulating interactions between a low-carbon fuel standard and other climate policy instruments in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Dorband, Ira Irina & Jakob, Michael & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Steckel, Jan Christoph, 2019. "Poverty and distributional effects of carbon pricing in low- and middle-income countries – A global comparative analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 246-257.
    12. Paul Lehmann & Patrik Söderholm, 2018. "Can Technology-Specific Deployment Policies Be Cost-Effective? The Case of Renewable Energy Support Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 475-505, October.
    13. Baldwin, Elizabeth & Cai, Yongyang & Kuralbayeva, Karlygash, 2020. "To build or not to build? Capital stocks and climate policy∗," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    14. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Spuler, Fiona & Stern, Nicholas, 2022. "The economics of climate change with endogenous preferences," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    15. Grace Skogstad, 2020. "Mixed feedback dynamics and the USA renewable fuel standard: the roles of policy design and administrative agency," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 349-369, June.
    16. Nicolas Schmid & Leonore Haelg & Sebastian Sewerin & Tobias S. Schmidt & Irina Simmen, 2021. "Governing complex societal problems: The impact of private on public regulation through technological change," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 840-855, July.
    17. Yeh, Sonia & Burtraw, Dallas & Sterner, Thomas & Greene, David, 2021. "Tradable performance standards in the transportation sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    18. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    19. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2017. "Commitment vs. Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 6355, CESifo.
    20. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:38:y:2021:i:5:p:596-630. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.