Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries

Mitigation of the potential impacts of climate change is one of the leading policy concerns of the 21st century. However, there continues to be heated debate about the nature, the content and, most importantly, the impact of the policy actions needed to limit greenhouse gas emissions. One contributi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zekarias Hussein, Thomas Hertel, Alla Golub
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IOP Publishing 2013-01-01
Series:Environmental Research Letters
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035009
_version_ 1797748071458668544
author Zekarias Hussein
Thomas Hertel
Alla Golub
author_facet Zekarias Hussein
Thomas Hertel
Alla Golub
author_sort Zekarias Hussein
collection DOAJ
description Mitigation of the potential impacts of climate change is one of the leading policy concerns of the 21st century. However, there continues to be heated debate about the nature, the content and, most importantly, the impact of the policy actions needed to limit greenhouse gas emissions. One contributing factor is the lack of systematic evidence on the impact of mitigation policy on the welfare of the poor in developing countries. In this letter we consider two alternative policy scenarios, one in which only the Annex I countries take action, and the second in which the first policy is accompanied by a forest carbon sequestration policy in the non-Annex regions. Using an economic climate policy analysis framework, we assess the poverty impacts of the above policy scenarios on seven socio-economic groups in 14 developing countries. We find that the Annex-I-only policy is poverty friendly, since it enhances the competitiveness of non-Annex countries—particularly in agricultural production. However, once forest carbon sequestration incentives in the non-Annex regions are added to the policy package, the overall effect is to raise poverty in the majority of our sample countries. The reason for this outcome is that the dominant impacts of this policy are to raise returns to land, reduce agricultural output and raise food prices. Since poor households rely primarily on their own labor for income, and generally own little land, and since they also spend a large share of their income on food, they are generally hurt on both the earning and the spending fronts. This result is troubling, since forest carbon sequestration—particularly through avoided deforestation—is a promising, low cost option for climate change mitigation.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T16:00:43Z
format Article
id doaj.art-861e9a3e11f54b99bdbd20aacf880bb6
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1748-9326
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T16:00:43Z
publishDate 2013-01-01
publisher IOP Publishing
record_format Article
series Environmental Research Letters
spelling doaj.art-861e9a3e11f54b99bdbd20aacf880bb62023-08-09T14:40:11ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262013-01-018303500910.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035009Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countriesZekarias Hussein0Thomas Hertel1Alla Golub2Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University , USACenter for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University , USACenter for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University , USAMitigation of the potential impacts of climate change is one of the leading policy concerns of the 21st century. However, there continues to be heated debate about the nature, the content and, most importantly, the impact of the policy actions needed to limit greenhouse gas emissions. One contributing factor is the lack of systematic evidence on the impact of mitigation policy on the welfare of the poor in developing countries. In this letter we consider two alternative policy scenarios, one in which only the Annex I countries take action, and the second in which the first policy is accompanied by a forest carbon sequestration policy in the non-Annex regions. Using an economic climate policy analysis framework, we assess the poverty impacts of the above policy scenarios on seven socio-economic groups in 14 developing countries. We find that the Annex-I-only policy is poverty friendly, since it enhances the competitiveness of non-Annex countries—particularly in agricultural production. However, once forest carbon sequestration incentives in the non-Annex regions are added to the policy package, the overall effect is to raise poverty in the majority of our sample countries. The reason for this outcome is that the dominant impacts of this policy are to raise returns to land, reduce agricultural output and raise food prices. Since poor households rely primarily on their own labor for income, and generally own little land, and since they also spend a large share of their income on food, they are generally hurt on both the earning and the spending fronts. This result is troubling, since forest carbon sequestration—particularly through avoided deforestation—is a promising, low cost option for climate change mitigation.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035009climate changemitigation policiescomputable general equilibriumpovertydeveloping countries
spellingShingle Zekarias Hussein
Thomas Hertel
Alla Golub
Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
Environmental Research Letters
climate change
mitigation policies
computable general equilibrium
poverty
developing countries
title Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
title_full Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
title_fullStr Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
title_full_unstemmed Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
title_short Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
title_sort climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries
topic climate change
mitigation policies
computable general equilibrium
poverty
developing countries
url https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/035009
work_keys_str_mv AT zekariashussein climatechangemitigationpoliciesandpovertyindevelopingcountries
AT thomashertel climatechangemitigationpoliciesandpovertyindevelopingcountries
AT allagolub climatechangemitigationpoliciesandpovertyindevelopingcountries