← 論文一覧に戻る

均衡下の汚染価格付け：生産・再配分・集計的影響

Pollution Pricing in Equilibrium: Production, Reallocation, and Aggregate Impacts (原題)

R. Andrew Butters, Jackson Dorsey, Ivan Rudik

Crossrefプレプリント2026-01-01#炭素価格経営インパクト: 調達リスク対象セクター: cross_sector
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.7377858
原典: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.7377858

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

EU-ETSの最初の17年を用い、企業財務・排出データから推定可能な均衡モデルを構築。短期的な排出削減は投入代替が硬直的で、主に汚染企業からクリーン企業への再配分が寄与することを示す。クリーン技術採用も許可価格ショックに因果的に反応し、価格倍増で排出は短期23%・長期31%減、生産減は短期4%・長期2.5%にとどまる。炭素コストは上流から下流企業へ転嫁される。

English

Using the first 17 years of the EU-ETS, the authors build an estimable equilibrium model of firm production and abatement. Short-run emissions cuts come almost entirely from reallocation across firms, while clean technology adoption responds causally to permit prices. Doubling permit prices cuts aggregate emissions 23% short-run and 31% long-run, with output falling only 4% then 2.5%, as carbon costs pass downstream.

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

炭素価格の実効性とコスト転嫁経路を実証的に示す点は、日本での炭素賦課金・GX経済移行債・排出量取引制度の設計議論に直接示唆を与える。特に上流から下流へのコスト転嫁はScope 3対応やサプライチェーン全体の価格設計を考える日本企業に有用。

In the global GX context

Provides rigorous empirical evidence on how carbon pricing transmits through supply chains, informing ISSB/TCFD disclosure of carbon cost exposure and transition-plan credibility. Relevant to debates on CBAM, EU-ETS reform, and the design of emissions trading in emerging schemes.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:炭素価格の短期・長期弾力性と再配分メカニズムを推定する構造モデルの実証枠組みを参考にできる。

🏢実務担当者:上流の炭素コストが自社の調達コストに転嫁される経路を理解し、Scope 3と調達戦略のリスク評価に活用できる。

🏛政策担当者:炭素価格の引き上げが生産コストと再配分に与える影響を踏まえ、制度設計と移行支援の根拠にできる。

📄 Abstract（原文）

How much does pricing pollution cut aggregate emissions, and at what cost? We develop a microfounded equilibrium model of firm production and abatement that can be estimated from standard firm financial and emissions data, without observing abatement effort directly. The model captures three adjustment margins: short-run input substitution, reallocation of output from dirty to cleaner firms, and long-run clean technology adoption. Applying it to the first 17 years of the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS), we find input substitution is rigid: firms cannot cut emissions in the short run without cutting output. Reallocation instead drives nearly all of the short-run aggregate emissions response, concentrated in sectors with heterogeneous emissions intensities, like power and cement, or with elastic demand, like refining. Clean technology adoption also responds causally to permit price shocks, reducing firms’ emissions intensity over the five years that follow. Doubling the permit price cuts aggregate emissions 23% in the short run and 31% in the longer run after induced clean technology adoption. In the short run, output falls by 4%, primarily because carbon costs pass from upstream polluting industries like electricity to downstream producers. In the long run, output falls just 2.5%, as clean technology adoption dampens these supply-chain impacts. Carbon pricing thus delivers substantial emissions reductions with moderate output effects, and much of the economic burden falls on downstream firms through higher upstream input costs.<br><br>Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w35682" TARGET="_blank">www.nber.org</a>.<br>

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 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。