Carbon Tax, Macroeconomic Stability, and the Growth Rate of GDP per Capita: Panel Evidence from Carbon-Pricing Economies
炭素税、マクロ経済の安定性、および一人当たりGDP成長率：炭素価格設定経済からのパネル証拠 (AI 翻訳)
Natcha Saramas, Supasuta Tuncharo, Aroonrak Tunpanit
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
16の炭素価格設定経済（2020～2024年）のパネルデータを用いて、炭素税が一人当たりGDP成長率に与える短期的影響を推定。固定効果モデルにより、炭素税率10ドル上昇で年間成長率が約1.2％ポイント低下する小規模な負の効果が確認された。インフレ・投資・エネルギー強度・政治安定性との交互作用は有意でなく、条件付け効果は見られなかった。炭素税設計には投資・物価安定政策の併用が重要と示唆。
English
Using panel data from 16 carbon-pricing economies (2020-2024), this study estimates the short-run effect of carbon taxes on GDP per capita growth. Country fixed-effects regressions show a small but significant negative effect: a $10 increase in carbon tax rate reduces annual growth by about 1.2 percentage points. No conditioning effects from inflation, investment, energy intensity, or political stability are found. The results support pairing carbon tax design with investment and price-stability policies.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本の炭素税導入・引き上げ議論において、GDP成長への短期的な負の影響が小さいことを示す実証結果は参考になる。ただし、投資・物価安定政策との併用が重要と示唆。
In the global GX context
This paper provides empirical evidence from multiple carbon-pricing jurisdictions, informing the global debate on the macroeconomic costs of carbon taxes. It underscores the need for complementary investment and macroeconomic stability policies.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Empirical evidence on carbon tax-growth tradeoff; useful for modeling and policy studies.
🏛政策担当者:Important for calibrating carbon tax rates and designing complementary fiscal policies.
📄 Abstract（原文）
This study examines the short-run effect of carbon taxation on the growth rate of GDP per capita, the annual first difference in log GDP per capita, using a panel of 16 carbon-pricing economies spanning Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa over 2020–2024. Country fixed-effects estimation with country-clustered robust standard errors follows formal model selection (F-test, Hausman test), checked for cross-sectional dependence. Three baseline specifications are estimated, Model 3 excluding the COVID-19 dummy as a robustness check; a fourth adds carbon tax interaction terms with inflation, investment, energy intensity and political stability to test whether these factors condition the relationship. A higher carbon tax rate has a small but statistically significant negative effect on growth across all three baseline models (a USD 10 increase implies roughly a 1.2-percentage-point reduction in annual growth, preferred specification); none of the interaction terms is significant, indicating no detectable conditioning effect. Investment shows a robust positive association with growth; inflation, a robust negative one. Energy intensity and the COVID-19 dummy enter with signs contrary to expectations once year fixed effects are excluded, and the carbon tax coefficient loses significance under a lagged specification, cautioning against a strictly causal reading. Findings support pairing carbon tax design with investment and price-stability policies.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- crossref https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm19070530first seen 2026-07-16 07:24:31
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。