排出の条件：米国全体の炭素政策排出のダイナミクスを探る

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Useful for scholars studying policy diffusion and political economy of carbon pricing.

🏢実務担当者:Offers insights into political risks and stakeholder dynamics affecting corporate carbon strategy.

🏛政策担当者:Provides evidence on which factors can facilitate carbon pricing adoption and emission reductions simultaneously.

抄録 本稿では、米国内の各州における炭素価格付け政策の採用について調査する。政策立案者は多くの手段を有しているが、炭素価格付けは、価格設定構造を通じて排出による有害な影響を抑制するために市場理論を活用する政策オプションである。地球温暖化問題がより顕在化するにつれ、政策による介入が必要となるため、これは重要である。採用を促進する要因と関連する力学を理解できれば、政策採用を促進する可能性がある。本研究では、まず米国の各州における炭素価格付け政策の採用を促進する要因を検討する。次に、最初のモデルからの知見に応じて、炭素排出を促進する要因を特定し、炭素価格付け政策の採用可能性を高め、かつ炭素排出を減少させる変数の重複を明らかにする。2005年から2020年までの州データを検討した結果、州の政治情勢や利益団体の存在など、複数の要因が州間の炭素価格付け政策の採用に影響を与えていることが判明した。炭素価格付け政策の採用可能性の向上と炭素排出量の削減との間にはいくつかの重複が見られるため、政策立案者と環境保護論者が協力し、採用を促進する可能性を模索することは有益であろう。 関連記事 Hedegaard, T. F., and K. Kongshøj. 2024. “Carbon Tax Revenues and How to Spend Them: Danes' Attitudes Toward Revenue Recycling.” *Politics & Policy* 52, no. 5: 992–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12619. Joo, J., J. Paavola, and J. Van Alstine. 2023. “The Divergence of South Korea's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) from the EU ETS: An Institutional Complementarity View.” *Politics & Policy* 51, no. 6: 1155–1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12566. Asadnabizadeh, M. 2024. “Did the Glasgow COP26 Negotiations Meet or Miss Article 6 (Carbon Markets) of the Paris Agreement? A Systematic Review of the Literature.” *Politics & Policy* 52, no. 4: 757–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12621.

AI 翻訳（deepseek-v4-flash）。 正確を期す場合は下の原文を参照してください。

ABSTRACT In this paper, we investigate the adoption of carbon pricing policies within the U.S. across states. While policymakers have many tools at their disposal, carbon pricing is a policy option that utilizes market theories to curtail harmful effects from emissions through pricing structures. This is important because as global warming issues become more evident, policy efforts will be needed to intervene. If we can understand what factors drive adoption and the dynamics involved, there is a potential to incentivize policy adoption. In this study, we first examine the factors that drive carbon pricing policy adoption in US states. Then, in response to the findings from the first model, we determine the factors that are driving carbon emissions to identify the overlap in variables that increase the likelihood of carbon pricing policy adoption and decrease carbon emissions. Examining state data from 2005 to 2020, we find that a multitude of factors influence interstate carbon pricing policy adoption, including the political landscape of the state, and the presence of interest groups to name a few. Some overlap is shared between increased likelihood of carbon pricing policy adoption and reduced carbon emissions, therefore it would be beneficial for policymakers and environmentalists to collaborate and potentially incentivize adoption. Related Articles Hedegaard, T. F., and K. Kongshøj. 2024. “Carbon Tax Revenues and How to Spend Them: Danes' Attitudes Toward Revenue Recycling.” Politics & Policy 52, no. 5: 992–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12619 . Joo, J., J. Paavola, and J. Van Alstine. 2023. “The Divergence of South Korea's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) from the EU ETS: An Institutional Complementarity View.” Politics & Policy 51, no. 6: 1155–1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12566 . Asadnabizadeh, M. 2024. “Did the Glasgow COP26 Negotiations Meet or Miss Article 6 (Carbon Markets) of the Paris Agreement? A Systematic Review of the Literature.” Politics & Policy 52, no. 4: 757–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12621 .

• openaire https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.70130first seen 2026-05-14 21:15:36 · last seen 2026-09-23 04:42:44