资源科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (10): 1801-1813.doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.10.04

• 能源与碳排放 • 上一篇    下一篇

公平视角下中国地区碳排放权分配研究

杨超1,吴立军2(),李江风1,黄天能1   

  1. 1. 中国地质大学(武汉)公共管理学院,武汉 430074
    2. 广东金融学院经济贸易学院,广州510520
  • 收稿日期:2018-05-28 修回日期:2019-05-21 出版日期:2019-10-25 发布日期:2019-10-25
  • 通讯作者: 吴立军
  • 作者简介:杨超,男,湖南长沙人,博士研究生,讲师,主要研究方向为资源环境经济。E-mail: soler.y@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家社会科学基金项目(15BJY024);广东省自然科学基金项目(2016A030313368);中山市科技局项目(2015B2348)

Distribution of carbon emission rights in China based on equity perspective

YANG Chao1,WU Lijun2(),LI Jiangfeng1,HUANG Tianneng1   

  1. 1. School of Public Administration, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan), Wuhan 430074, China
    2. School of Economics and Trade , Guangdong University of Finance, Guangzhou 510520, China
  • Received:2018-05-28 Revised:2019-05-21 Online:2019-10-25 Published:2019-10-25
  • Contact: WU Lijun

摘要:

在国际碳博弈中,碳排放权的主流分配原则有10余种之多,应用不同分配原则的分配结果差别迥异,地区对不同原则的偏好或排斥也较为悬殊。为寻求分配协商共识,要求必须建立以公平为基础的分配方案。本文首先基于2017年全球碳浓度变化测算出全球排放空间和中国的排放总额,进而利用等人均、等产出、等空间、历史排放以及地区碳汇5个单一原则实现从全国总额到地方配额的分配。根据单一原则下各地区的分配数据计算各原则对应的相对剥夺系数,并以相对剥夺系数为基础的公平感受评价构建权重,最终形成多原则综合加权的分配方案。通过对2017年为例的碳排放权分配研究,得出如下结论:①基于单一原则的配额分配结果表明,历史排放原则是最有利于中国排放权配额获取以及最能体现地区分配公平的原则。②五大原则的综合加权分配结果表明,获得配额最大的3个地区分别为:山东、江苏、广东;获得配额最小的3个地区分别为:海南、宁夏、甘肃。各省配额汇总的全国碳排放权总额为603464.5万t,与当前实际排放存在数200000万~300000万t的差距之差,与中国国际减排责任分担较为一致。③基于个体感受公平的加权分配方案具有良好的操作性、稳健性和兼容性。为切实推动全国碳排放权分配工作实施开展及更好的实现地区生态资源配置公平,主要建议如下:碳排放权配额分配要求科学合理的制定全国分配总额,使地区和企业形成稳定的配额预期;有效设计分配原则方案,兼顾公平性和可操作性,地区减排责任分担不搞“一刀切”。

关键词: 碳排放权, 分配, 公平视角, 相对剥夺系数, 综合加权, 中国

Abstract:

In the international carbon game, there are more than 10 kinds of main distribution principles of carbon emission rights. Different distribution principles lead to different results, and the preference or aversion of different principles vary greatly from region to region. In order to seek consensus on emission reduction and allocation, it is necessary to establish a fair allocation scheme. This study first calculated the global emission space and China’s total quotas based on the global carbon concentration changes in 2017, and then allocated the quotas for different regions in the country under five individual allocation principles, namely per capital principle, equal output principle, equal space principle, historical emission principle, and regional carbon sequestration principle. Relative deprivation coefficient was calculated using the allocation data of each region under these five individual principles, and weights were derived based on relative deprivation coefficients. Finally, the allocation of multi-principle comprehensive weighted scheme was performed. From the analysis of emission quotas in 2017, the main conclusions are as follows: (1)The historical emission principle is the most beneficial to China in acquisition of emission quotas, while the per capital principle can demonstrate fairness of equitable regional allocation. (2) Results obtained from the multi-principle comprehensive weighted allocation scheme show that the three areas with highest quota are Shandong, Jiangsu, and Guangdong provinces, whereas the three areas with lowest quota are Hainan Province, Ningxia Autonomous Region, and Gansu Province. The total amount of national carbon emission rights collected by the provincial quotas is 6.034 billion ton, which is billions of difference from the actual emission at present and is in line with China's international responsibility for emission reduction. (3) the weighted allocation scheme based on the individual feeling fairness principle has good operability, robustness and compatibility. The main suggestions are as follows: carbon emission right quota allocation requires a scientific and reasonable formulation of the total amount of national allocation, so that regions and enterprises form a stable quota expectation. To effectively design the scheme of carbon emission allocation principles, we need to take into account fairness and operability, and regional responsibility sharing for emission reduction should not be “one-size-fits-all”.

Key words: carbon emission rights, allocation, equity perspective, relative deprivation coefficient, comprehensive weight, China