Demand Substitution Between Meat and Plant-Based Meat Alternatives Under Meat Taxes and Price Incentives: Evidence from U.S. Households
肉税と価格インセンティブ下での肉と植物由来代替肉の需要代替：米国家計からの証拠 (AI 翻訳)
Srijan Budhathoki, Jill McCluskey
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
米国の家計パネルデータを用いて、牛肉・鶏肉と植物由来代替肉（PBMA）の需要体系を推定。炭素税は牛肉消費を8〜20%削減し、食事由来の温室効果ガス排出を最大16%減らすが、PBMA補助金は効果が小さいと示した。需要側の政策が供給側の補助より有効と結論。
English
Using U.S. household panel data, this study estimates demand for meat and plant-based alternatives. A carbon tax could cut beef consumption by 8-20% and dietary GHG emissions by up to 16%, while PBMA subsidies have negligible effects. Demand-side policies are more effective than supply-side subsidies.
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
日本の食料・農業政策やカーボンプライシング導入議論に示唆。特に、食料由来排出削減の政策設計において、消費税が補助金より効果的というエビデンスは、日本のGX政策にも応用可能。
In the global GX context
Provides empirical evidence for carbon pricing in the food sector, relevant to global climate policy discussions. Highlights the limited impact of subsidies for alternatives, informing policy design under ISSB and transition finance frameworks.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:食品需要の価格弾力性と炭素税効果の定量分析手法を参考に。
🏢実務担当者:食品企業は炭素税リスクと代替品市場の動向を把握。
🏛政策担当者:炭素税の食品部門への適用と補助金の非効率性を政策設計に反映。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) have been marketed as a tool for reducing the environmental footprint of food consumption, yet their actual market performance and policy relevance remain contested. Using the Nielsen Consumer Panel, we estimate an EASI demand system across conventional beef, conventional chicken, plant-based (PB) beef, PB chicken, and PBMA veggie products for the years 2021 to 2024, a period that follows the PBMA U.S. sales peak. Censored participation is corrected via the Shonkwiler-Yen two-step procedure with full categorical demographic controls in the selection stage. PBMA participation rates declined markedly across our sample period, yet PBMAs retain persistent price premiums over their conventional counterparts. We find that PBMAs are own-price elasticities are elastic, while conventional meats are approximately unit elastic. Hicksian cross-price elasticities reveal meaningful substitutability between PB beef and conventional beef and between PB chicken and conventional chicken, but Marshallian cross-price elasticity estimates are negative, reflecting dominant income effects. Policy simulations suggest that a carbon tax calibrated to the U.S. social cost of carbon would reduce household beef consumption by 8% to 20% and aggregate dietary greenhouse gas emissions by 6.5% to 16.2%, whereas a $0.10 per pound PBMA subsidy alone generates negligible emissions reductions. Combining the carbon tax with a PBMA subsidy yields marginally greater reductions. Heavy meat consumers and low-income households face disproportionately large absolute reductions in consumption under the carbon tax. Our results imply that demand-side climate policy in the food sector should prioritize consumption taxes on high-emission conventional meats over supply-side subsidies for alternatives.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.404569first seen 2026-08-01 05:08:14
🔔 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。