Abstract

Carbon taxes are an economically effective and efficient policy measure to address climate change mitigation. However, they can have severe adverse distributional effects. Recycling parts of the fiscal revenues to vulnerable, lower income households through cash transfers (social assistance) is an option to also overcome associated political difficulties. This paper simulates the distributional impacts of such a combined policy reform in Peru. In a first step, we assess the distributional impacts of varying carbon tax rates. In a second step, we evaluate different scenarios of recycling revenues through existing or expanded transfer schemes towards vulnerable households. The results indicate that a national carbon tax, without compensation, would increase poverty but have no significant impact on inequality. When tax revenues are recycled through transfer schemes, however, poverty would actually decrease. Depending on the amount to be redistributed and the design of the cash transfer scheme, our simulations show a proportional reduction in the poverty headcount of up to around 17%. In addition, the paper underlines how crucial it is to go beyond aggregate measures of poverty to better identify losers from such reform; and assure that the “leave no one behind” principle of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is addressed.

Highlights

  • Literature has highlighted that a mix of policies may be needed as trade-offs, next to synergies, usually arise when trying to jointly achieve different Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Pradhan et al, 2017)

  • Ex­ amples are the Absolute Gini Index or the variance. While both are important for informing policy analysis, this study focuses on relative inequality as it fa­ vors the comparability with other studies and it is arguably better suited to complement poverty analysis (Nino-Zarazúa et al, 2017)

  • It is crucial that social goals are not violated, as advocated by the call for sustainable development in both the SDGs and the Paris agreement; these international frameworks imply that social and environmental goals should be met jointly

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Literature has highlighted that a mix of policies may be needed as trade-offs, next to synergies, usually arise when trying to jointly achieve different Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Pradhan et al, 2017). Given significant differences in societal structures, poverty incidence and transfer programs across LMICs, it is vital to understand the individual country context and identify which combinations of compensatory cash transfers and carbon tax levels work best. This is the second research gap, which has to consider the following factors. Most studies do not go beyond changes in aggregate poverty and inequality measures, it is important to fully understand winners and losers from the policy reform (Renner, 2018) Given this background, we address the following research questions in the context of Peru: (i) What would be the fiscal, poverty and distributive impacts of a carbon tax?

Carbon taxes and compensatory mechanisms
A carbon tax in Peru and the role of social protection
GTAP and the resulting MRIO
The reach of social assistance in Peru
The distributional effects of a carbon tax: merging ENAHO and MRIO
Scenarios: targeting and carbon tax values
Footprints by percentiles
Distributional impacts of a carbon tax
Compensatory effects of different scenarios
Poverty transitions and fiscal impoverishment of the poor
Conclusions and policy implications
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call