《经济管理学刊》| 陈诗源，任菲，虞吉海：生产网络视角下的碳税制度
文摘
财经
2024-11-25 19:00
北京
进入公众号 点击右上角“...”设为星标 防止内容走丢
生产网络视角下的碳税制度
Carbon Tax in China：A Production Network Perspective
【原文刊载在《经济管理学刊》2024年第3卷第3期】（2024年9月出版）
陈诗源、任菲、虞吉海，北京大学光华管理学院
Shiyuan Chen, Fei Ren, Jihai Yu（Guanghua School of Management,Peking University）
本文从生产网络视角，探究对能源消费部门征收碳税如何通过生产网络联动影响各部门生产投入、产出及碳排放。由于生产网络的存在，征收碳税不仅会通过减少征税部门产出降低经济体总碳排放，还会通过生产网络上下游关联引发间接影响。因此，基于部门在生产网络中所处位置进行针对性征收碳税才能实现最大的减排效果。本文构建生产网络视角下的碳税模型，结合2020年中国投入产出表与估算的42部门、153部门分部门碳排放数据，模拟分析征收小额碳税对征税部门劳动投入、产量、碳排放以及经济体总碳排放的影响。结果表明，对各部门征收碳税引发的减排效果与部门直接排放量的排序并非一一对应；对42部门中“石油、炼焦产品和核燃料加工品”“电力、热力的生产和供应”“金属冶炼和压延加工品” 征税带来的减碳效果最明显，尤其是“石油、炼焦产品和核燃料加工品”部门，其碳税减排效应和碳减排效率都位于42部门中的首位，因此在制定碳税政策时可予以重点考虑。
关键词：碳中和；生产网络；碳税；隐含碳流动
Keywords: Carbon Neutrality; Production
Network; Carbon Tax; Embodied Energy Flow
一、引言
2020年9月22日，在第七十五届联合国大会上，我国提出了碳达峰碳中和目标，自此，“双碳目标”成为我国重大战略决策，优化能源结构、发展低碳技术成为重中之重。碳排放权交易（简称“碳交易”）作为核心的市场调节机制，成为重要的市场化降碳政策手段。“碳税”作为另一种碳定价机制，是引导经济主体主动优化能源结构，降低温室气体排放，推动经济社会发展绿色转型的重要市场激励型政策工具，并且被认为是各类减排措施中最划算的方式（Baranzini et al., 2000）。中国开征碳税的可行性一直是研究的热门话题。回顾文献发现，2013年启用碳排放权交易试点后，国内对碳税制度的研究主要集中在讨论碳税与碳交易协同发展，定量分析的研究有所停滞。而早期对于碳税制度定量研究所依赖的“可计算一般均衡”CGE模型，往往涉及多部门、多地区、多模块（生产模块、价格模块、收入模块、支出模块、投资模块、外贸模块、能源与环境模块等）以及众多变量（生产要素价格与数量、商品价格与数量、宏观变量、政策变量等）和数百个待校准参数（生产/消费的替代弹性、收入支出份额、贸易参数），模型复杂，计算成本高，且难以厘清变量间关系与政策传导机制。因此，本文旨在根据我国当前经济运行和碳排放现状，采用一个简化的一般均衡模型，探讨征收碳税对我国经济与环境的影响，作为碳税定量研究的延续和补充。整个经济体作为一个复杂网络，蕴含着产业结构和行业间交互的重要信息。对某一或某些部门征收碳税会改变被征税部门的生产成本，使其调整生产投入与产出，通过生产网络进一步带动上下游各部门的投入与产出变化，影响经济体总碳排放。若错误施加征税部门，可能通过生产网络中蕴含的直接与间接关联，引起经济体总碳排放量的增加。因此，仅基于各部门直接碳排放征收碳税对于降低整个经济体碳排放的效率不是最高的，还要考虑碳税通过生产网络关联引发的间接效果。综上所述，鉴于目前国内缺乏基于最新的经济和环境数据的碳税定量研究，尤其缺乏生产网络视角下碳税政策的影响机制分析，本文根据我国最新投入产出表与估算的部门碳排放数据，基于投入产出关联下的碳税模型，模拟碳税在生产网络中的传导，识别各部门的碳税减排效应，为双碳目标下的碳税制度设计提供一个新视角。本文运用King et al.（2019）构建的生产网络视角下的碳税模型，探究我国开征碳税对征税部门劳动投入、产量、碳排放以及经济体总碳排放的影响。首先，假设部门的碳排放是随中间投入递增的规模报酬不变的函数，在一般均衡条件下求得零碳税时的均衡解；在此基础上，进一步得到异质性生产函数与消费偏好下，开征碳税对各部门产品相对价格、中间产品投入、劳动投入、产量、碳排放及消费的边际影响；最后，定义碳税减排效应为零碳税基准下，对部门征收碳税对经济体总碳排放的边际影响：![]()
其中，第一项是税收返还效应，部门自身排放量越大，对其征税将获得的税收收入越多，消费者得到税收返还后，便可将更多钱用于消费，进而促进各部门生产和碳排放；第二项是部门之间由于生产网络关联引起的部门间排放影响，是相对上游与相对下游的部门排放影响的加权总和；最后一项来自部门征税后做出反应所导致的自我扭曲。若错误施加征税部门，可能通过税收返还效应削弱减排效果。在本文模型下，对多个部门征收碳税所引起的经济体总碳排放变化是对各单一部门征税的减排效应的线性加总。![]()
图2展示了2020年42部门直接碳排放与各部门碳税减排效应，可以看出，由于生产网络隐含的间接影响，对各部门征税带来的经济体总减排效果与各部门直接碳排放排序并非一一对应。
![]()
根据国内碳交易市场现状，国内碳价格在40-80元/吨。本文以每吨50元碳税为基准，模拟分析对单个部门征收碳税引起该部门劳动投入、产量、碳排放以及经济体总碳排放的变化。主要发现如下：第一，基于生产网络结构的碳税政策比只考虑直接碳排放的碳税政策更有效。例如，42部门中“电力、热力的生产和供应”部门的直接碳排放量高于“石油、炼焦产品和核燃料加工品”部门，但通过生产网络作用引发的经济体总减排效果不及后者。第二，对42部门中“石油、炼焦产品和核燃料加工品”“电力、热力的生产和供应”“金属冶炼和压延加工品”或对153部门中“电力、热力生产和供应”“精炼石油和核燃料加工品”“钢压延产品”等部门征税减排效果最明显。这些部门作为生产网络中主要的原料供应商和排碳大户，征税将促使它们改革生产技术、优化能源结构，减排效果进一步通过生产网络汇聚，进而实现经济体总碳排放的有效下降。第三，在边际碳税意义下，征税有效的减排部门不多，若盲目对所有行业征税，可能仅仅导致经济结构大幅度调整，并不会有效降低经济体总碳排放。第四，在制定碳税政策时，也要从征税效率角度考虑对部门产量的影响，避免对生产网络结构冲击过大引发过多的转型成本。本文发现，在碳税减排效应和碳减排效率双重意义下，“石油、炼焦产品和核燃料加工品”均位于42部门的首位，因此，在制定碳税政策时可重点考虑该部门。本文从生产网络视角切入，根据部门间投入产出关联下的碳税模型，模拟探究中国征收消费性碳税对经济和环境的影响，是碳税制度设计的一个新视角和有效补充。对于碳税研究，本文认为有以下颇具挑战但有现实意义的研究方向。第一，考虑对各部门最终需求征收碳税。生产源于需求，因此，可以通过对需求端征收碳税引发需求下降，进而传递到生产端实现碳减排。对此，需要首先计算各部门最终需求所隐含的碳排放，其不仅是中间投入的函数，而是依赖整个生产网络结构，此时碳税通过生产网络的传导将更加复杂。第二，修正模型以探讨生产网络视角下碳排放权交易制度对经济和环境的加总影响，为制定碳市场和碳税协同发展政策提供参考。On September 22,2020,President Xi Jinping announced at the 75th Session of the United Nations General Assembly that China would strive to peak CO2 emissions before 2030,and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060.China is taking pragmatic actions towards these goals.As a responsible country,China is committed to building a global climate governance system that is fair,rational,cooperative and beneficial to all,and makes its due contribution to tackling climate change using its greatest strengths and most effective solutions.China's energy conservation and emission reduction policy system originated in the 1980s.With transition from a planned economy to a market economy,China's energy-saving and emission reduction policies have gradually transitioned from administrative directives to market-oriented economic incentives,accumulating rich experience in reducing carbon emissionsduring the past 40 years.The establishment of the dualcarbon goals in 2020 provides clearer goals and greater challenges for China's emission reduction undertakings.Carbon pricing mechanism is an important market-based policy option adopted by many countries and regions to address climate issues,and it mainly includes two methods：carbon tax and carbon emissions trading.Carbon emissions trading is currently the core market regulation mechanism in China.China proceeded carbon emissions trading pilots in seven provinces and cities in 2013,and the carbon trading market was officially launched in July 2021.It covered more than 4 billion tons of emissions,becoming the world's largest carbon trading market once the market went online.Carbon trading is playing an important role in the process of China's emission reduction,but its effect is limited.Carbon tax,another representative market incentive policy tool,is frequently advocated as a cost-effective instrumentin reducing emissions,so it might be necessary to be introduced to China in due time to make up for the shortcomings of current carbon trading policies.Many countries or regions have successfully achieved the synergistic development of carbon tax and carbon trading.Therefore,the feasibility of levying a carbon tax in China and how to realize the coordinated development of carbon tax and carbon market are hot topics of research.Studies on China's carbon tax system mainly focus on the feasibility analysis of introducing a carbon tax and using large-scale macro models such as “Computable General Equilibrium” (CGE) to simulate the impact of carbon tax on emission reduction and economics.Especially after the launch of the carbon emissions trading pilot in 2013,domestic research on the carbon tax has been concerned more about the design of the carbon tax mechanism,and the coordinated development of carbon tax and carbon trading,while research on quantitative analysis has stagnated.Earlier quantitative research on China's carbon tax system based on CGE models are complicated,with high computational costs,and it is difficult to clarify the policy transmission mechanism.Imposing carbon tax would have macroeconomic and environmental impacts.The economy acts as a complex network that closely connects the production sector with the consumption sector.The production network contains rich information about the structure and interactions of industries.Acemoglu et al.(2012) find that the production network is an important channel for the propagation of sectoral individualshocks into macroshocks.Microeconomic idiosyncratic shocks may lead to aggregate fluctuationsin the presence of intersectoral input-output linkages.Therefore,when formulating or evaluating policies,it is not comprehensive enough to consider the direct impact alone,but necessary to take the aggregate effects caused by the production network into account.The propagation mechanism proposed by Acemoglu et al.(2012) also applies to the carbon tax.King et al.(2019) found that sector-specific carbon tax changes can have complex general equilibrium effects in the presence of intersectoral linkages.They provide an analytical characterization of how incremental taxes on emissions of any set of sectors impact aggregate emissions,thereby offering a novel perspective for the analysis of carbon taxes.In this paper,we focus on theeffects of carbon tax in China from the perspective of production networks.We first calculate sectoral carbon emissions generated from energy consumption in 2020 and estimate the embodied carbon flow matrix based on Chinese 42-sector and 153-sector input-output tables.Then we simulate how an incremental sector-specific carbon tax influences the economys total carbon emission through the intersectoral production network linkage as well as the impact on the labor input,output and carbon emission of the taxed sector drawing on the model constructed by King et al.(2019).We find that,due to the existence of production networks,the imposition of a carbon tax will not only reduce the total carbon emissions of the economy by decreasing the output of the taxed sector,but also trigger indirect effects through the upstream and downstream linkages.Therefore,targeting sectors based on their position within the production network can achieve a greater reduction in aggregate emissions than taxing sectors solely based on their direct emissions.The simulation results show that the sectoral ranking of the carbon reduction effect and direct emissions does not correspond one-to-one.Taxing “Petroleum,Coking Products and Processed Nuclear Fuel Products”, “Production and Supply of Electricity and Heat”, and “Metal Smelting and Rolling Processed Products” among the 42 sectorsor taxing “Production and Supply of Electricity and Heat”, “Refined Petroleum and Processed Nuclear Fuel Products” and “Rolled Steel Products” among the 153 sectors will bring the most significantcarbon reduction effect.As the above sectors are the main suppliers of raw materials and major carbon emitters in the production network,imposing carbon tax will prompt them to reform their production technologies and optimize their energy structures,thereby achieving an effective reduction in the total carbon emissions of the economy through their upstream and downstream influences.In addition,taxing on “Petroleum,Coking Products and Processed Nuclear Fuel Products” can bring the biggest decrease in total carbon emissions with a smaller drop of its own production.
原文引用：陈诗源, 任菲, 虞吉海. 生产网络视角下的碳税制度[J]. 经济管理学刊, 2024, 3(3): 143-172.
点击左下角“阅读原文”，即可下载全文PDF
（苹果系统需复制到浏览器打开）
学刊订阅方式及更多论文下载，请登录学刊官网www.qjem.cn
*我们期待公众号原创稿件，来稿、合作、问题请联系：qjem-wx ；推广内容如有侵权请您告知，我们会在第一时间处理或撤销；转载仅供思考，不代表《经济管理学刊》立场；其他平台任何形式转载请注明(来源：经济管理学刊 )。
