All Issue

2024 Vol.23, Issue 1 Preview Page

Research Article

Estimating the Social Cost of Carbon through Benefit Transfer Techniques

편익이전 기법을 통한 탄소의 사회적 비용 추정

Donggyu Yi1
,
Sungkyu Lee2*
이 동규1
,
이 성규2*
1Associate Professor, School of Economics, University of Seoul
2Ph.d Candidate, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University
1서울시립대학교 경제학부 부교수
2서울대학교 환경대학원 박사과정
*Corresponding Author
31 March 2024. pp. 149-175
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Amid the increasing emphasis on addressing climate change as a critical issue in the international community, cost-effective carbon reduction policies such as carbon pricing mechanisms are actively being considered in many countries. In theory, carbon pricing is expected to induce optimal decision-making by applying a price level equivalent to the social cost of carbon (SCC). This study re-estimates domestic SCC values through value transfer and meta-analysis based on recent estimates of SCC values in the United States. The analysis shows that the value transfer estimates are 45,548 KRW/tCO2 for IWG (2021) and 107,172 KRW/tCO2 for EPA (2023). These results are consistent with the benefit transfer results of meta-regression analysis using 560 SCC estimates from 31 previous studies. The benefit transfer results for IWG (2021) are very similar to the SCC value (44,000 KRW/tCO2) commonly used in existing domestic preliminary feasibility studies. However, the benefit transfer results for EPA (2023) are estimated to be more than double the previous estimate, suggesting that if this figure is used as the carbon price in the future, it will exert strong pressure on companies’ carbon reduction activities.

Keywords
social cost of carbon
benefit transfer
value transfer
meta-analysis

기후변화에 대한 대응이 국제사회에서 중요한 이슈로 부각되면서 비용효과적인 탄소저감정책인 탄소가격제도 또한 여러 나라에서 적극적으로 고려되고 있다. 이론적으로 탄소가격이 탄소의 사회적 비용(SCC)과 같은 수준으로 설정된다면 최적의 의사결정을 유도할 수 있는 것으로 기대되기에, 본고는 적정 수준의 가격 설정에 도움이 되도록 최근 미국에서 추정된 SCC 값들에 대하여 가치이전과 메타분석을 통해 국내 SCC로 재추정하였다. 분석결과, 가치이전 추정치는 IWG(2021)의 경우 45,548원/tCO2, EPA(2023)의 경우 107,172원/tCO2로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 31개 선행연구의 560개 SCC 추정치를 표본으로 하는 메타회귀분석의 편익이전 결과와도 일관적이었다. IWG(2021)에 대한 편익이전 결과는 기존 국내 예비타당성조사에서 활용하는 SCC값(44,000원/tCO2)과 매우 유사하지만, EPA(2023)에 대한 편익이전 결과는 기존보다 두 배 이상 높게 추정되어 향후 해당 수치가 탄소가격으로 활용될 경우 기업들의 탄소저감활동을 강하게 유도하는 효과가 나타날 것으로 판단된다.

키워드
탄소의 사회적 비용
편익이전
가치이전
메타분석
References
1
권오상(2022). 환경경제학 제4판. 서울 : 박영사.
2
이동규･정준환･조철근･임재규･김주영･한진석･이창훈(2017). 수송용 에너지 상대가격 합리적 조정방안 연구. 세종: 기획재정부･국토교통부･산업통상자원부･환경부･한국조세재정연구원.
3
이동규･박명덕･조성진･정연제･전호철･이창훈(2018). 발전용 에너지 제세부담금 체계 합리적 조정방안 연구. 세종: 기획재정부･산업통상자원부･환경부･한국조세재정연구원.
4
한국개발연구원(2017). 교통부문사업 편익산정 방법론 연구. 세종: 한국개발연구원.
5
Bergh, J. and Botzen, W.(2014). "A lower bound to the social cost of CO2 emissions." Nature Climate Change 4 : 253-258. 10.1038/nclimate2135
6
EPA(2023). "EPA Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances." Washington D.C.: United States Environmental Protection Agency.
7
Freeman III, A. M., Herriges, J. A. and Kling, C. L.(2014). "The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values - Theory and Methods." 3rd Edition. Washington D.C.: Resource For the Futhre Press. 10.4324/9781315780917
8
IWG(2010). Technical Support Document: - Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis ­ Under Executive Order 12866 -. United States : Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases.
9
IWG(2013). Technical Support Document: - Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis - Under Executive Order 12866 -. United States : Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases.
10
IWG(2021). Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990. United States : Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases.
11
Nordhaus, W.(2014). "Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Concepts and Results from the DICE-2013R Model and Alternative Approaches." Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 1 : 273-312. 10.1086/676035
12
Nordhaus, W.(2018). "Evolution of Assessments of the Economics of Global Warming: Changes in the DICE model." Climatic Change 148 : 623-640. 10.1007/s10584-018-2218-y
13
OECD(2012). "Mortality Risk Valuation in Environment, Health and Transport Policies." Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Publishing. 10.1787/9789264130807-en
14
OECD(2024). Purchasing power parities (PPP) (indicator). doi: 10.1787/1290ee5a-en. 10.1787/1290ee5a-en
15
Robinson, L. A.(2008). Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions in Homeland Security Regulatory Analyses. Washington D.C. : United States Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security.
16
Ståle, N.(2007). Practical tools for value transfer in Denmark guidelines and an example. Copenhagen: Danish Environmental Protection Agency.
17
Tol, R.(2008). "The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes." Economics 2 : 1-23. 10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2008-25
18
Tol, R.(2023). "Social cost of carbon estimates have increased over time." Nature climate change 13 : 532-536 10.1038/s41558-023-01680-x
19
Wang, P., Deng, X., Zhou, H. and Yu, S.(2019). "Estimates of the social cost of carbon: A review based on meta-analysis." Journal of Cleaner Production 209 : 1494-1507. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.058
Information
  • Publisher :Korea Energy Economic Institute·Korea Resource Economics Association
  • Publisher(Ko) :에너지경제연구원·한국자원경제학회
  • Journal Title :Korean Energy Economic Review
  • Journal Title(Ko) :에너지경제연구
  • Volume : 23
  • No :1
  • Pages :149-175
  • Received Date : 2024-03-04
  • Revised Date : 2024-03-19
  • Accepted Date : 2024-03-19
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.22794/keer.2024.23.1.007
Journal Informaiton Korean Energy Economic Review Korean Energy Economic Review
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close