Which Green Technology to Subsidize? Evidence from Electric Vehicles in South Korea
どのグリーンテクノロジーに補助金を出すべきか？韓国における電気自動車の証拠 (AI 翻訳)
Youngjin Hong, In Kyung Kim, Frank Verboven
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本稿は、排出削減技術への補助金の効果を比較するフレームワークを開発し、韓国の乗用車市場に適用。現在の補助金をBEVからHEVに再配分すれば総排出量を47%追加削減できると推定。また、BEV優遇策がHEV優遇策を上回るには、電力の炭素強度を約45%削減する必要があると示唆。
English
This paper develops a framework to compare the effectiveness of subsidies for emission-reducing technologies, applied to the South Korean passenger vehicle market. It finds that reallocating existing subsidies from BEVs to HEVs could reduce total GHG emissions by an additional 47%. For BEV-focused subsidies to outperform HEV-focused ones, the carbon intensity of electricity would need to fall by about 45%.
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
日本でもEV/HEV補助金の配分が政策的課題であり、本論文の「中間技術（HEV）が最クリーン技術（BEV）より効果的になりうる」という知見は、日本の補助金設計に重要な示唆を与える。電力の脱炭素化度合いが鍵となる点も、日本の電源構成を考慮する際に参考になる。
In the global GX context
Globally, this paper challenges the prevailing prioritization of BEV subsidies over HEVs, providing a rigorous framework applicable to many countries. It underscores that the effectiveness of clean technology subsidies depends on substitution patterns and grid decarbonization, offering clear policy guidance for transition finance and emission reduction strategies.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:The paper provides a novel framework for comparing technology subsidies and an empirical application with mileage heterogeneity, useful for transport and environmental economics researchers.
🏢実務担当者:Corporate sustainability teams can use the findings to advocate for subsidy allocations that favor HEVs in the near term, adjusting transition planning based on grid decarbonization pace.
🏛政策担当者:Policymakers should consider that subsidizing intermediate technologies like HEVs may yield greater emission reductions than solely supporting BEVs, especially when grid carbon intensity is high.
📄 Abstract（原文）
We develop a framework to compare the relative effectiveness of subsidizing alternative emission-reducing technologies. We show that an intermediate technology may reduce emissions more effectively than the cleanest technology if it induces sufficiently greater substitution away from the prevailing high-emission technology. We apply the framework to the South Korean passenger vehicle market using a demand model that incorporates mileage heterogeneity, an important determinant of fuel-type choice. First, reallocating existing subsidies from battery electric vehicles (BEVs), the cleanest technology, to hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), an intermediate technology, would reduce total greenhouse gas emissions by an additional 47%. Second, for a BEV-focused subsidy policy to outperform an HEV-focused policy, the carbon intensity of electricity generation would need to fall by approximately 45%. Our findings suggest that HEV subsidies remain more effective than BEV subsidies until consumers become sufficiently willing to switch to BEVs or electricity generation becomes sufficiently decarbonized.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.14446first seen 2026-07-17 04:10:37
🔔 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。