Scholarlink

<p>Addressing climate change with the necessary urgency will only be successful if climate policies are perceived as socially fair and equitable by the majority of the population. However, as recognised in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), energy and climate modelling still struggles to bring together detailed economic and inequality impacts of climate policies. To help reduce this gap, we link GCAM-Europe, a geographical expansion of a well-established integrated assessment model, with MEDUSA, a tool for high-resolution distributional analysis. Our analysis explores how different implementations of the European Union (EU)‘s climate policy portfolio affect various consumer groups across and within Member States. It finds that a general EU-wide carbon price, while cost-efficient, has regressive impacts, disproportionately burdening low-income Member States and households. In contrast, policies based on national plans (NECPs) are less regressive. Gender and the urban-rural dimension also play an important role, with man-headed and rural households being the most affected.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

An across and within country analysis of who bears the costs of EU decarbonisation

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月23日

查看全文
  • Eva Alonso-Epelde,
  • Xaquín García-Muros,
  • Jon Sampedro,
  • Clàudia Rodés-Bachs,
  • Natasha Frilingou,
  • Dirk-Jan Van de Ven

摘要

Addressing climate change with the necessary urgency will only be successful if climate policies are perceived as socially fair and equitable by the majority of the population. However, as recognised in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), energy and climate modelling still struggles to bring together detailed economic and inequality impacts of climate policies. To help reduce this gap, we link GCAM-Europe, a geographical expansion of a well-established integrated assessment model, with MEDUSA, a tool for high-resolution distributional analysis. Our analysis explores how different implementations of the European Union (EU)‘s climate policy portfolio affect various consumer groups across and within Member States. It finds that a general EU-wide carbon price, while cost-efficient, has regressive impacts, disproportionately burdening low-income Member States and households. In contrast, policies based on national plans (NECPs) are less regressive. Gender and the urban-rural dimension also play an important role, with man-headed and rural households being the most affected.