资源科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 872-883.doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.05.05

• 碳排放 • 上一篇    下一篇

中国碳市场配额分配方法探索

赵永斌1,2(), 丛建辉2,3(), 杨军1,2,3, 张艺璇3   

  1. 1. 山西大学晋商学研究所,太原 030006
    2. 山西大学绿色发展研究中心,太原 030006
    3. 山西大学经济与管理学院,太原 030006
  • 收稿日期:2018-09-08 修回日期:2018-12-06 出版日期:2019-05-25 发布日期:2019-05-25
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:赵永斌,男,山西阳泉人,博士生,主要研究方向为区域开放与绿色发展。E-mail:zhaoyongbin1992@163.com

  • 基金资助:
    山西省软科学研究计划项目(2017041029-2);山西省哲学社科规划课题(2017054026);世界银行市场伙伴准备基金项目(P145586)

An innovative allowance allocation method in China’s unified national emissions trading scheme

Yongbin ZHAO1,2(), Jianhui CONG2,3(), Jun YANG1,2,3, Yixuan ZHANG3   

  1. 1. Shanxi Institute of Business Studies, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
    2. Research Center for Green Development, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
    3. School of Economics and Management, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
  • Received:2018-09-08 Revised:2018-12-06 Online:2019-05-25 Published:2019-05-25

摘要:

区域碳排放不平衡是中国统一碳市场配额分配方法设计需要考虑的特殊背景,而历史法和基准线法无法解决由该背景导致的“鞭打快牛”效应和“拔苗助长”效应,亟需探索适用于中国碳市场的配额分配方法。本文首先梳理了碳配额分配的相关研究,发现在中国碳市场,历史法存在固定基年和滚动基年选择的两难,基准线法存在“一产品一基准值”原则取舍的两难。其次,基于“共同但有区别的减排责任原则”提出一种配额分配方法——历史—基准趋近法。最后,分别采用历史法、基准线法和历史—基准趋近法进行配额试分配并进行比较。结果显示,历史—基准趋近法不仅可以同时避免“鞭打快牛”效应和“拔苗助长”效应,而且具有良好的政策目标协同性,在控排系数公平性、分配结果精准性和减排成本可行性3个方面均优于另外2种配额分配方法,有效降低了区域经济发展不平衡加剧的风险。研究结论表明,历史—基准趋近法较适用于区域排放不平衡的情形,可作为中国统一碳市场启动初期配额分配方法选择和优化的参考。

关键词: 碳市场, 配额分配, 区域碳排放不平衡, 公平性, 历史—基准趋近法, 中国

Abstract:

The imbalance of regional emissions is a peculiarity for China’s unified carbon market. However, neither grandfathering method nor benchmarking method can avoid punishing good performers and applying too much pressure on poor performers. By examining existing research on allowance allocation, we found that in China’s carbon market, the grandfathering method faces a dilemma of choosing a fixed-base-year or a rolling-base-year, and the benchmarking method faces a dilemma ofwhether to apply the principle of “one benchmark for one product.” Based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibility for emission reduction, this studyproposeda new method of allowance allocation, that is, grandfathering-benchmarking approaching method. Then, using this method to simulate the allowance allocation and comparing the result with the methods of grandfathering and benchmarking alone,the results show that the grandfathering-benchmarking approaching method not only can avoid punishing good performers and applying too much pressure on poor performers, but also work in coordination with carbon reduction target. Comparing with the other two methods, itsemission control coefficientis fair, the allocation resultis more accurate, and the cost of emission reduction is more acceptable. It has better performance in reducing the risk of worsening regional economic imbalance.The conclusion of the study shows thatgrandfathering-benchmarking approaching methodcan deal with the situation of strong regional emission disparity. It can be used as a reference for the selection and optimization of allowanceallocation method in the initial stage of China’s unified carbon market.

Key words: carbon market, allowance allocation, imbalance of regional emissions, fairness, grandfathering-benchmarking approaching method, China