تاثیر آستانهای مالیات بر کربن بر رابطه آلودگی زیست محیطی و نابرابری توزیع درآمدی در راستای بهبود توسعه اجتماعی
محورهای موضوعی : مطالعات توسعه اجتماعی ایرانمحبوبه صادقی نوری 1 , رویا سیفی پور 2 * , مرجان دامن کشیده 3 , امیررضا کیقبادی 4
1 - گروه اقتصاد، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 - گروه اقتصاد، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
3 - گروه اقتصاد، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
4 - گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحد تهران مرکزی، داشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: مالیات بر کربن, آلودگی زیست محیطی, توزیع درآمد, بهبود توسعه اجتماعی, کشورهای توسعه یافته, مدل رویکرد آستانهای پانل,
چکیده مقاله :
در راستای کاهش انتشار گازهای گلخانه ای و تهدیدات اقلیمی ناشی از آن اقتصاددانان سیاستهای مختلفی از جمله سیاست مالیات بر کربن را مطرح نموده اند که می تواند بر سایر متغیرهای اقتصادی تاثیر بگذارد. هدف مقاله حاضر بررسی تاثیر آستانهای مالیات بر کربن بر رابطه مابین آلودگی زیست محیطی و نابرابری توزیع درآمدی در راستای بهبود توسعه اجتماعی است. برای این منظور از مدل با رویکرد آستانهای پانل (PSTR) بر اساس داده‌های سالانه کشورهای توسعه یافته طی دوره 2021-2008 استفاده شد. نتایج برآورد قسمت غیرخطی مدل نشان از وجود رابطه مثبت متغیر نرخ تورم با شاخص نابرابری توزیع درآمدی را نشان میدهد و متغیرهای درآمد دولت از مالیات بر آلودگی زیست محیطی، نرخ مالیات بر کربن، سرمایه گذاری، سرمایه انسانی، نرخ رشد تولید ناخالص داخلی سرانه و سطح اشتغال نیروی کار رابطه منفی با شاخص نابرابری توزیع درآمدی دارد. بطوریکه به ازای یک واحد افزایش در درآمد دولت از مالیات بر آلودگی زیست محیطی و نرخ مالیات بر کربن، نابرابری توزیع درآمد به ترتیب 0/11 و 0/26 واحد کاهش می‌یابد. این نشان میدهد که نحوه توزیع مجدد درآمد حاصل از مالیات بر کربن می‌تواند نابرابری درآمدی را با انتقال از بخش خطی به غیرخطی بین 2 تا 26 درصد کاهش دهد و اثرات توزیعی مالیات‌های زیست محیطی سبب کاهش نابرابری درآمدی و کاهش توسعه اجتماعی و فقر در کشورهای توسعه یافته شود که بر اهمیت طراحی سیاست و مکانیسم‌های هدف بازتوزیعی تاکید می‌کند.
In order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases and the resulting climate threats, economists have proposed various policies, including the carbon tax policy, which can affect other economic variables. The purpose of this article is to investigate the threshold effect of carbon tax on the relationship between environmental pollution and inequality of income distribution in order to improve social development. For this purpose, the panel threshold approach model (PSTR) was used based on the annual data of developed countries during the period of 2008-2021. The estimation results of the non-linear part of the model show the existence of a positive relationship between the inflation rate variable and the income distribution inequality index, and the government income variables from environmental pollution tax, carbon tax rate, investment, human capital, GDP growth rate Per capita and the employment level of the labor force have a negative relationship with the inequality index of income distribution. So that for one unit increase in government income from environmental pollution tax and carbon tax rate, income distribution inequality decreases by 0.11 and 0.26 units, respectively. This shows that the way of redistributing income from carbon tax can reduce income inequality by moving from linear to non-linear sector between 2 and 26% and the distributional effects of environmental taxes reduce income inequality and reduce social development and poverty in developing countries. It is found that it emphasizes the importance of policy design and re distributive target mechanisms.
دکتر صادق صالحی، دکتر علی اصغر فیروزجائیان، هادی عباسی کلان (1399)، بررسی تأثیر سرمایه اجتماعی بر رفتارهای محیط زیستی . برنامه¬ریزی و توسعه گردشگری. دوره 9، شماره 3.
Arant, R., Larsen, M., & Boehnke, K. (2021). Acceptance of Diversity as a Building Block of Social Cohesion: Individual and Structural Determinants. Frontiers in psychology, 594.
Bezan, Fatemeh, and Samavati, Aida. (2019). Fiscal Effects of Carbon Dioxide Tax on Household Expenditures in Iran: Information Available in Environmental Environment. Applied theories of economics, 7(1), 239-264. https://www.sid.ir/paper/387352/fa.pdf [In Persian]
Bilgaev, A, Dong, S, Li, F, Cheng, H, Sadykova, E & Mikheeva, A 2020, Assessment of the current eco-socioeconomic situation of the Baikal Region (Russia) from the perspective of the green economy development. Sustainability, 12: 3767.
Bobrova, V & Kirchmeer, L 2020, Forecasting of environmental pressure indicators as part of the monitoring of the ecological and socio-economic development of the extracting region. In: ecological-socio-economic systems: Models of competition and cooperation (ESES 2019), pp. 52-56, Atlantis Press.
Bond, P., & Basu, R. (2023). ‘Unequal ecological exchange'worsens across time and space, creating growing Northern environmental liabilities–CADTM.
Chen, S. (2022). The inequality impacts of the carbon tax in China. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1-10.
Cho, S., & Kang, H. (2016). Putting Behavior Into Context Exploring the Contours of Social Capital Influences on Environmental Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 1-31.
Dugstad, A., Grimsrud, K. M., & Lindhjem, H. (2023). Can the acceptance of a carbon tax be increased? The effect of tax revenue recycling and redistribution among households and companies.
Fremstad, A., & Paul, M. (2019). The impact of a carbon tax on inequality. Ecological Economics, 163, 88-97.
Fremstad, A., & Paul, M. (2019). The impact of a carbon tax on inequality. Ecological Economics, 163, 88-97.
Frolov, DP, Popkova, EG, Strekalova, AS & Marushchak, IV 2017, Strategic planning of regional ecological development: adaptation of Elinor Ostrom’s principles in Russia. In Russia and the European Union, Springer, pp. 39-45, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-55257-6_6.
Gründler K., Scheuermeyer P.: Growth Effects of Inequality and Redistribution: What Are the Transmission Channels?. Journal of Macroeconomics 55: 293–313.
Khastar, M., Aslani, A., & Nejati, M. (2020). How does carbon tax affect social welfare and emission reduction in Finland?. Energy Reports, 6, 736-744.
Kitsai, JA, Sytnik, AA, Kabanov, OV, Sakhbieva, AIl, Latysheva, NA, Okhotnikov, IlV, Sibirko, IV 2021, Socio-economic development and its impact on the ecological environment in the Russian Federation. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 19: 981-989.
Law C.-H., Soon, S.-V.: The impact of inflation on income inequality: the role of institutional quality. Applied Economics Letters, 1–4. https://doi:10.1080/13504851.2020.1717425 (2020).
Lubell, M. (2002). Environmental Activism as Collective Action. Environment and Behavior, 34, 431-454.
Malerba, D., Chen, X., Feng, K., Hubacek, K., & Oswald, Y. (2022). The impact of carbon taxation and revenue redistribution on poverty and inequality (No. 11/2022). IDOS Policy Brief.
Mdehheb, Z, Elkihel, B, Bouamama, M, Hammouti, B, Delaunois, F 2020, The environmental management system and its application impacts on the business economy in the eastern region of Morocco. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 18: 13-20.
Murat Bayraktar 2023. Social Capital and Income Inequality: Findings From Selected High Income Countries. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3824788/v1
Osakwe P. N., Solleder O.: Wealth Distribution, Income Inequality and Financial Inclusion: A Panel Data Analysis, UNCTAD Working Papers No:4, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2023).
Paavola, J. (2017). Health impacts of climate change and health and social inequalities in the UK. Environmental Health, 16(1), 61-68.
Saelim, S. (2019). Carbon tax incidence on household demand: effects on welfare, income inequality and poverty incidence in Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production, 234, 521-533.
Safiullin, MR, Safiullovna, MG, Elshin, LA 2020, Impact of environmental risks on key parameters of development of regional sectors of economy (Case study: Agricultural industry in the Republic of Tatarstan), Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 18: 567-573.
Schmittmann, J. M. (2023). The Financial Impact of Carbon Taxation on Corporates: Japan. Selected Issues Papers, 2023(034).
Shang, B. (2023). The Poverty and Distributional Impacts of Carbon Pricing: Channels and Policy Implications. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 17(1), 64-85.
Sheikhpour, Mahbobeh, Mirzaei, Hamidreza, Nabi Yan, Siddiqa, Zare Mehrjardi, Mohammad Reza. (1401). Investigating the amount of carbon on production and comparing it with the fuel tax in the industry sector. Quarterly Scientific Research Journal of Quantitative Economics, (Ready Publications) https://doi.org/10.22055/jqe.2023.41140.2495 [In Persian]
Shevchenko, VA, Soloviev, AM, Popova, NP 2021, Energy and economic efficiency of corn silage production with flat grain of soy bean on reclaimed lands of upper volga. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 19: 947-950.
Soltanijad, Masoumeh, Jalai, Seyed Abdul Majid, Zayandeh Roudi, Mohsen. (1401). Investigating the green budget on government spending and economic well-being of households using the Nord Haus model. Applied Economics, 12 (No. 40 (Spring 1401)), 68-79. DOI: 10.30495/JAE.2022.60526.1347 [In Persian]
Videras, J., Owen, A. L., Conover, E., & Wu, S. (2012). The Influence of Social Relationships on Pro Environment Behaviors. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 63, 35-50.
Wakefield, S. E., Elliott, S. J., Eyles, J. D., & Cole, D. C. (2006). Taking Environmental Action: The Role of Local Composition, Context, and Collective. Environmental Management, 37(1), 40-53.
Zarei, S, Moosavi, N, Motamed, MK 2020, The role of environment and social capitals in Iranian economic growth. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 18: 383-395.
Zhao, S., Fujimori, S., Hasegawa, T., Oshiro, K., & Sasaki, K. (2022). Poverty and inequality implications of carbon pricing under the long-term climate target. Sustainability Science, 1-16.
Zhongming, Z., Linong, L., Xiaona, Y., Wangqiang, Z., & Wei, L. (2021). Climate action can lessen poverty and inequality worldwide.