Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Climate policy: it’s the (emissions) price, stupid!

By Geoff Carmody - posted Tuesday, 3 August 2010


The Coalition and Labor want climate “direct action”, but won’t consider a carbon price now. This bipartisan recipe for high-cost greenhouse gas reductions, at worst, may deliver none.

We’ve learned nothing from history. We’re bad at “direct action”. Look at the home insulation, “green” loans, etc, debacles. We should set an emissions price and let the market sort it out. How?

From Rio (1992) to Copenhagen (2009) negotiations have failed. But they provide two lessons:

Advertisement
  • countries won’t apply the same mitigation policies at the same time; and
  • they keep haggling based on failed emissions production-origin policy models.

These lessons tell us what not to do, and suggest a way forwards.

Putting a price on carbon, whether via an ETS or a tax, is the same as applying a broad-based indirect tax. Countries have introduced these at different times and different rates. Our GST is an example.

Why are GST-type taxes successful when a carbon tax is not? They’re consumption-destination taxes. They exclude exports and tax imports the same as locally produced substitutes. They don’t undermine competitiveness. Production-origin emissions taxes hit exports and exclude imports.

Governments unilaterally proposing a production-origin GST would be ridiculed. Production-based carbon taxes are similarly treated. Quelle surprise!

Those countries introducing production-based carbon taxes try to reduce adverse competitive effects by building-in crudely devised trade-exposed sector “carve outs”, emasculating them.  Others take no action.

Advertisement

Australia is not just trying to cut indigenous emissions. We need the rest of the world to act over time to reduce global emissions. If it doesn’t, nothing we do (at 1.4 per cent of global emissions, and falling) makes much difference. This reality should drive our policy approach.

Nationally, we could devise, unilaterally adopt, and sell by example to other countries, a climate policy model that (i) reduces indigenous emissions; and (ii) does not undermine our trade competitiveness. Any country can adopt this “no regrets” model unilaterally.

Globally, production-origin emissions, by definition, equal consumption-destination emissions. In national accounting jargon, global GDP equals global GNE. The emissions embodied in both are the same.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

First published in the Australian Financial Review on July 12, 2010.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Geoff Carmody was a director of Geoff Carmody & Associates, a former co-founder of Access Economics, and before that was a senior officer in the Commonwealth Treasury. He died on October 27, 2024. He favoured a national consumption-based climate policy, preferably using a carbon tax to put a price on carbon. He has prepared papers entitled Effective climate change policy: the seven Cs. Paper #1: Some design principles for evaluating greenhouse gas abatement policies. Paper #2: Implementing design principles for effective climate change policy. Paper #3: ETS or carbon tax?

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Geoff Carmody

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 13 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy