碳交易机制下可再生能源投资价值与投资时机研究

中国承诺2017年启动全国性碳排放交易系统,在碳交易机制下,可再生能源项目可以通过CCER交易获得额外收益。由于碳价格是随着市场条件而随机波动的,碳价波动性使得可再生能源发电项目投资具有了期权性质的权利,即未来不确定性可能包含更高的价值。可再生能源企业在做投资决策时,可以选择立即投资,也可以选择推迟投资,等待更多信息来提高项目收益,而立即投资的项目回报必须足够高以克服等待期权的蕴含价值。为了研究碳价波动下可再生能源项目投资,本文采用实物期权法的三叉树模型,测算了三类可再生能源发电项目投资的npv及其实物期权价值(ROV)。根据延迟实物期权决策规则,三类项目均执行期权延迟投资决策。本文还计算了在无政府补贴和有政府补贴两种情形下,三种可再生能源项目在不同时点的栏杆价格,以确定项目的投资时机。栏杆价格随着政府补贴的增加而逐步下降,说明政府补贴会促进可再生能源项目投资;栏杆价格随着时间的推移而逐步上升,意味着时间跨度越大,不确定性越大,需要更高碳市场价格来确定投资时机。本文对影响可再生能源项目投资因素敏感性进行了分析,结果表明碳价波动率与可再生能源发电项目的栏杆价格呈现正相关的关系,说明碳价波动性增加了企业投资的期权价值,却推迟了企业开展投资的时间。随着中国碳交易体系的不断完善,碳价波动幅度会趋于平稳,从而促进发电企业进行可再生能源发电项目投资。     

绿证交易、发售电配额制与可再生能源财税减负效应

为促进清洁能源消纳利用和减轻标杆电价政策财税负担,绿色电力证书(绿证)核发和认购制度已在全国试行。为验证两类政策并存下绿证交易的财税减负作用,该文构建绿证定价和财税减负效应模型,分类探讨不同交易机制和配额安排:绿证自由市场、发售电配额强制市场交易如何影响售证方定价策略和配额主体履约抉择,论证绿证市场均衡和政策互动如何影响可再生能源补助支出、电价附加和绿证交易的税负转嫁效应。模型论证与分类市场情景表明:①绿证交易提供了低成本履约的制度安排,有助于财税减负;②电力市场管制和交叉补贴电价政策下,发电商配额导致火电企业最优履约抉择是自建绿电项目而非绿证交易,绿证市场有价无市;③售电配额的市场交易效率更高,但发电商实施领导跟随-产量最优策略将造成电力和绿证价格双攀升,变相增加电价负担;④并网消纳和补贴拖欠削弱绿证价格而降低补贴转嫁,售电配额调整通过跨区绿电需求变化影响税负转嫁。这些结论蕴含的政策意义是:①兼顾绿电支付意愿、成本分担与应用目标,健全绿证认购市场体系;②理顺绿证定价与惩罚机制,确保绿证市场竞争均衡与履约效率;③完善省级配额机制,引导具备成本优势的跨区绿证交易;④协调政策互动效应,增强绿电溢价和绿证减负效应。     

配额免费分配法下市场结构对碳交易市场运行效率的影响

在产品市场和碳交易市场均为完全竞争的市场结构中,碳交易机制是一种有效的环境政策,但在现实环境下,产品市场和碳交易市场往往都是不完全竞争的。本文采用复杂适应系统仿真的方法,构建基于SWARM的碳交易市场仿真模型,建立碳排放权交易市场仿真系统,研究产品市场和碳交易市场结构对碳交易市场的运行效率的综合影响,同时为了降低产品市场垄断企业对碳交易市场运行效率的影响,本文通过增加碳交易市场配额缺口和增加参与交易的中小控排企业数量两种方式,探寻如何在产品市场不完全竞争的环境中设计合适碳交易机制。研究发现:1产品市场垄断会导致碳交易市场流动性不稳定,出现波动聚集等现象。2在产品市场处于相同结构时,碳交易市场垄断会导致成交量和成交额减少,流动性降低。3不同市场结构对碳交易市场的价格波动没有显著影响。4产品市场的市场结构会影响碳交易市场运行的有效性,完全竞争的产品市场下,碳交易市场的收益波动符合随机游走,而垄断力会改变这一特征。5市场流动性随着碳配额缺口的扩大发生显著变化,成交量和成交额随之显著增加,在产品市场垄断的市场结构中,通过加紧配额供给,可以增加碳交易市场的流动性,改变碳交易市场低迷的交易状况。6鼓励小企业参与市场交易对碳交易市场的流动性没有产生显著影响,但会在一定程度上降低垄断企业在碳交易市场上的支配力,从而改善碳交易市场的有效性。     

不同碳减排政策对内外资企业竞争力的影响比较

一方面,由于我国内外资企业的生产效率和碳排放效率差距较大,不同的碳减排政策势必会对内外资企业的市场竞争力带来不同的影响;另一方面,已有文献大多在完全竞争的框架下对不同减排政策的实施效应进行分析,而事实上我国碳减排政策所覆盖的产业大多是不完全竞争甚至是寡头垄断。由此,我们基于内外资企业存在低碳技术差距这一新的研究视角,通过构建两阶段博弈模型来比较分析相同碳强度减排目标下强制减排、碳税与碳交易等三种减排政策对内外资企业产量、市场份额及其社会总产量的影响,从而有利于我国从妥善处理内外资关系的角度制定更有针对性的减排政策。结果表明:(1)三种减排政策都降低了内资企业的产量和市场份额,且内外资企业低碳技术差距越大时内资企业的市场份额下降越多。(2)强制减排降低了社会总产量,碳税和碳交易同等幅度地减少了社会总产量。(3)最优税率仅仅是减排目标的增函数。(4)市场出清的碳交易价格和碳税税率相等,且其数值仅与减排目标正相关,而与碳排放权的分配无关。(5)碳交易比碳税更有利于"保护"内资企业的市场竞争力。相关政策启示如下:(1)尽快确定普适的碳排放核算标准,核算出各行业内外资企业的低碳技术差距;(2)尽快在全国范围内启动碳交易机制,建立促进缩小内外资企业低碳技术的机制;(3)在碳交易市场条件不成熟的行业可以率先推出碳税政策;(4)政府应该根据内外资企业低碳技术差距来对不同行业采取最适宜的减排政策,而非"一刀切"。     

Linking China’s emissions trading pilot schemes

All seven emissions trading pilots in China operate independently. One challenge facing most of them is the low inclusion thresholds for enterprises and the few total covered emissions, which negatively influences the effects of the emissions trading systems (ETSs). Some pilot sites, such as Guangdong, Hubei, Tianjin and Beijing, have indicated their willingness to link their schemes with others. ETS linking could expand scheme coverages and therefore help to reduce the overall costs of achieving the linked schemes’ emissions control targets. Linking could also help to address the issues of carbon leakage and reduce price fluctuations. The potential benefits and feasibility of linking different pilot systems are analyzed in this article. The seven pilot regions are at different stages of social and economic development, with significant differences in total emissions and emissions structures as well as carbon abatement potentials and costs. Through linking, more-developed regions such as Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen, which are typically considered to face higher mitigation costs, will have the opportunity to achieve their emissions control targets by purchasing carbon units from less-developed regions, which will earn financial revenues from selling the units. To realize this win-win result, a series of policy and technical barriers at both the central government and pilot government levels needs to be overcome. Establishing a unified national emissions trading market would appear to be the ideal solution to these challenges, but it will take considerable time and will not be the short-term solution. In the absence of a unified national scheme, it is recommended that the central government encourage pilot schemes to link, that it develops corresponding national policies to support the linking efforts and that the pilot schemes that are intended to be linked coordinate on certain design elements. Based on the coordinating need, the major elements of an ETS can be divided into four categories: elements that need mutual recognition (cap setting and allowance allocation methods); elements that should be completely identical (compliance mechanisms, price containment measures, banking and borrowing rules, and offset mechanisms); technical elements that are preferably identical and easy to coordinate (MRV standards, technical registry standards); and elements that require no coordination (coverages and scopes).     

中国试点碳市场监管机制研究与国际经验借鉴

2015年9月《中美元首气候变化联合声明》宣布中国将于2017年启动全国性碳排放交易体系以来,中国碳市场的筹建及7大试点的运行备受国内外媒体和学术界的关注。相关预测显示,中国碳市场届时将一举超过目前全球最大的欧盟碳排放交易体系EU ETS成为世界第一大碳交易市场,但由于7个试点运行时间较短、试点地区重视程度以及建设侧重点不统一等原因,目前中国碳市场存在着监管机构职责不清、监管体系不健全、监管政策不到位等一系列问题。本研究从监管机构、监管政策、技术支持平台、监管内容等方面梳理和分析了中国7个试点碳市场的监管体系,并将其与EU ETS、RGGI等国际上发展较为成熟的碳市场监管体系进行了对比分析后发现:1在监管手段方面,EU ETS与RGGI均侧重于依靠法律手段,而中国碳市场的监管手段则主要以地方性规范文件为主;2在监管机构职能方面,EU ETS的二级管理体系有效划分了监管范畴,保证了各级监管力度。RGGI的第三方独立监管模式则很好的保证了监管的公平性,充分发挥了碳市场事中监管作用,而中国碳市场则主要依赖于地方发改委来进行监管,存在职责划分不明晰等问题;3在监管重心方面,EU ETS侧重于对市场运行中的操作性风险和交易性风险进行防范,RGGI则更加关注交易风险的实时监控,而中国碳市场目前主要针对市场价格波动风险进行了防范。由此对中国即将建立的全国性碳市场监管机制设计提出了如下建议:1提高碳市场立法效力,完善监管政策体系;2平衡监管权力,成立专职监管机构;3加强过程监管,完善电子平台安全建设;4加大碳市场信息披露力度,鼓励公众及行业协会参与,形成外部监督机制。     

混合碳减排制度设计研究

碳减排是减缓气候变暖的必由之路,国际社会正在积极推动全球碳减排。我国已向国际社会承诺了碳减排目标,并正在大力开展相关政策的研究和制定。碳税和碳交易是多年来各国激励碳减排最主要的两大机制。这两种机制各有优缺点,它们适当的混合机制可扬长避短,创造出更优越的机制。我们认为,碳税和碳交易机制之间最大的差别在于碳税机制有较低的制度成本(包括建立者一机制所需要的人力物力的投入,以及监管成本等),在操作性上更简便;而在对市场条件和信息的变化上没有碳交易机制的灵活性强,但从另一方面,这种灵活性也恰恰是风险产生的根源之一,它增加了企业在碳排放决策方面的风险和难度;此外,碳税相对于碳交易是间接的碳减排激励机制,碳交易机制的减排效果更直接。基于这些观察,我们设计出一种混合碳减排机制,它是碳税和碳交易机制的有机结合。该混合机制包含两个部分:首先是累进制碳税制度,小企业只缴纳碳税;其次,碳交易制度,建立碳交易市场并对于大企业确定初始碳排放权,对于大企业的超排,将按照高起点的碳税税率加以惩罚。这一混合机制,既考虑了不同企业之间在碳排放权上的公平性,又考虑了机制的效率,并在保障机制效率的条件下尽可能降低企业在碳排放决策上的风险。这些正是这一混合机制的优越性所在。我们还探讨了这一混合机制在我国实施的可行性,并提出了在具体实施过程中所应注意的若干重要事项,并给出了相关的政策建议。本文的探讨可以为政府碳排放政策制定部门提供参考。     

A study on the design of a hybrid policy for carbon abatement

A necessary way to mitigate global warming is carbon reduction, which the international community is now actively promoting. China has committed a target goal for carbon reduction to the international society, and has devoted a great effort toward researching the impact of related policies. Carbon taxation and carbon trading are the two main mechanisms to advocate carbon abatement, which many countries have been using. Each of these two mechanisms possesses advantages and disadvantages, and an appropriate combination of them can make best use of their advantages while bypassing their disadvantages, creating a superior mechanism. In our opinion, the main differences between these two mechanisms are that carbon taxation has a lower institution cost (consisting of the related infrastructural investment and the regulation cost, etc), and is easier to operate, but lacks the flexibility in response to variations of market conditions. However, this flexibility is just the origin of risk, which increases the difficulty for firms in their decision of carbon abatement and is an indirect way to incentivize carbon abatement, compared to carbon trading, which has a more direct effect in carbon reduction. Based on the above observation, we present a hybrid mechanism of carbon abatement, which is an organized combination of carbon taxation and carbon trading. It consists of two parts: first, the carbon taxation, which has a progressive tax rate, second, the carbon trading. Small firms will only pay the carbon tax, while large firms, will first need to get the initial carbon emission quotas by some way, and then trade it in the carbon market if necessary. For firms with extra emissions, they will receive a punishment according to a high carbon tax rate. This hybrid policy considers the equity between different firms in carbon emission rights as well as the efficiency of the mechanism while decreasing the risk level for firms in the carbon emission decision, making it superior to the two previous policies. We also analyze the feasibility of this hybrid policy in China, address some important issues in the implementation of this hybrid policy in China and present the relevant suggestions. The discussion in this paper can serve as a reference to the government in the decision of carbon policies.     

THE Clean Development Mechanism: Making it Operational

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is a facility for trading `certified emission reductions (CERs) between developing and developed countries, thus saving non-renewable carbon emissions by promoting renewable energy, energy efficiency and/or carbon sequestration projects in LDC's. The purpose of the CDM is to help these latter countries meet their obligations under the Kyoto Protocol while at the same time promoting “sustainable” development in the former countries, thereby reducing the build-up of greenhouse gases (GHG). This paper examines the progress in achieving a workable CDM in time for the first commitment period (2008–2012), and the kinds of initiatives that can be pursued in the agricultural, land-use and forestry sector in tropical countries. The critical element for the success of the CDM is the participation of a broad cross-section of buyers (ultimately from developed countries) and sellers (from developing countries) of CERs. Trading is the final step, which starts with project formulation, through successful implementation and then certification. This paper lays out a market-based framework for promoting CDM transactions between private sector project developers and traders and public sector policy makers, with regulators, governed by CDM rules, overseeing the smooth running of the CDM. However, as there are numerous players; it is proposed that trial CDM projects be demonstrated with the support of National/International bodies to iron out the problems and come up with practical solutions so that carbon trading can become a reality. Most rules for the CDM were clarified at the 7th Conference of Parties (CP) in October/November of 2001 in Marrakesh. An executive Board (EB) was appointed and this EB is in charge of proposing workable ground rules to promote the CDM. These have to be submitted for approval by the 8th CP in late 2002. Three broad kinds of projects qualify for the CDM, these are: renewable energy projects that will be alternatives to fossil fuel projects; sequestration projects that offset GHG emissions; and energy efficient projects that will decrease the emissions of GHG. It is possible to have a combination of these initiatives. A fourth type covering GHG reduction is omitted. As elaborated in the text, in order to qualify for the CDM, the proposed projects may have to have additional costs when compared to the alternative(s). Two time frames have been agreed for CDM projects to qualify for the first commitment period, namely 7 years (with an option of two 7-year renewals) and 10 years. Also, for land-use, land-use change and forestry projects only afforestation/reforestation initiatives are recognized as being permissible for the first commitment period. These rules seem rather shortsighted, as forestry and/or renewable energy projects usually require more than 21 years to be fully effective. Also, the major cause of deforestation is clearing land for agriculture, not harvesting wood. Therefore, improving agricultural productivity may be the best way to reduce deforestation and its subsequent release of GHGs. These conditionalities should be re-examined when rules for the second commitment period are decided. However, various agricultural and land-use projects are discussed under the existing guidelines which could qualify as CDM projects in the first period.     

可再生能源电价补贴的大气环境效益分析

可再生能源的电价补贴是一项旨在加速推进可再生能源广泛应用的政策机制,对中国能源结构调整(降低煤电比例)、改善大气环境具有重要的现实意义。鉴此,本文将可再生能源发电带来的空气污染物(CO_2、SO_2、NO_X和PM_(2.5))排放的减少作为衡量大气环境质量改善的效益指标,利用2012年中国投入产出表建立包含温室气体、污染气体和颗粒物模块的可计算一般均衡模型,从总量和行业的视角量化研究了实施可再生能源电价补贴政策对改善大气环境的积极作用,考察了可再生能源发电补贴辅以硫税、硫税及碳税这两种冲击的情景。研究表明:可再生能源电价补贴减少了温室气体、污染气体的总排放量和颗粒物浓度,在补贴的基础上辅以硫税不仅可以有效地增进大气环境福利效益,而且还能抵消征税对经济增长的负面效应;可再生能源电价补贴使清洁能源发电对火电产生替代效应,各个行业排放的CO_2、SO_2和NO_X均下降;但这一替代效应在工业部门尤其是重工业部门相对有限,这也证明了工业部门的减排压力较于其他产业(农业部门和服务业部门)更大;补贴可促进可再生能源发电量不断提升,进而优化能源结构,这是增进大气环境效益的根本原因。上述结果意味着短期内要提高可再生能源电价附加标准,补贴与税收双管齐下以增强减排力度。而可能面临的可再生能源电价补贴资金不足问题则意味着中期内要实现补贴方式逐渐向定额补贴、绿色证书模式过渡,利用市场机制确定补贴标准;长期内需最终取消补贴政策,倒逼技术进步,推动整个可再生能源产业的可持续发展。     

CGE model-based analysis of the neutralized hybrid carbon policy and its decomposed effects on economic growth,carbon reduction,and energy utilization costs

The hybrid policy is a flexible policy tool that combines features of carbon trading and carbon taxation.Its economic and environmental effects under China's background are still not studied in detail.Given the exogenous carbon reduction targets,carbon prices,and carbon tax-rates,by computable general equilibrium modeling methods and factor decomposition methods,this article investigates direct and cascaded effects of the hybrid policy on economic growth,energy utilization,and carbon emission on the national level and the sector level,with China's national input-output data-set.Stepwisely,policy scenarios with irrational estimated results are selectively excluded based on comprehensive evaluation among economic,carbon reduction and other policy targets.As a result,against national economic conditions in 2007,the hybrid policy,with a carbon reduction target of -10%,a carbon tax-rate of around $10,and a ceiling carbon price of $40,is highly recommended,because of its significant lower economic loss,lower energy utilization cost,and practical robustness against fluctuation of energy market and carbon market.Furthermore,by decomposition analysis,carbon reduction-related costs are decomposed into a direct part that includes carbon allowance price and carbon tax,and an indirect part as the energy price incremental induced by direct carbon costs.Gross carbon reduction may be decomposed into three parts such as energy intensity,economic scale,and technical progress.And,carbon taxation is the main policy tool that stimulates to improve the energy efficiency.     

中国资本回报率:考虑碳减排成本的新核算

对资本回报率进行绿色核算既符合当前绿色发展的新理念,同时也是判断我国经济增长可持续性的重要依据。使用超越对数生产函数估算1960—2014年碳排放的影子价格;利用Hall-Jorgenson租金公式测算剔除碳减排成本的中国资本回报率的动态演变趋势。对中国资本回报率重新估算克服了因忽略碳减排成本而导致的高估,估算结果更加科学可靠。研究结果:(1)中国碳排放的影子价格由1960年的56.34元/t上升到2011年的1651.69/t,根据影子价格计算的碳减排成本占GDP总量的份额年均为31%。(2)不考虑碳减排成本和税收因素的基础资本回报率变动趋势可以划分为三个阶段。1952-1983年为第一阶段,资本回报率在波动中由高位逐步回落。1984—2010年是第二个阶段,基础资本回报率保持平稳。2011年以来是第三个阶段,这一阶段中国的资本回报率呈台阶式下降趋势,特别是2012—2014年,税后的资本回报率已经难以抵补企业投资的机会成本。(3)考虑碳减排成本将导致资本回报率平均下降约12%。其中1960—1975年资本回报率呈下降趋势。1976—2008年资本回报率基本保持稳定,资本回报率平均值为15.2%。2009年以后,资本回报率则表现出逐年下降的趋势,2014年的估算值甚至降为-1%。本文仅考虑了碳减排成本,如果再考虑诸如二氧化硫等废气排放、废水与固废排放的成本后,绿色资本回报率的估算值将更低。建议:在当前的经济形势下,应实施激励企业技术创新以及减税(尤其是生产税)政策遏制资本回报率下降的趋势。另外,需要采取分阶段递增的环境规制政策,逐步实现企业环境外部成本的内部化。     

“后补贴”时代地方政府新能源汽车补贴策略研究

新能源汽车补贴是政府为了发展新能源汽车产业所采取的一项激励政策。现有文献虽在微观层面上研究了政府补贴对新能源汽车推广的影响,但多将补贴政策限定为固定额度的政府补贴,未考虑中国特殊的两级政府补贴政策尤其是地方政府补贴对新能源汽车推广的影响,且在补贴政策的设计上未与新能源汽车的实际推广目标相结合。基于"后补贴"时代的地方政府既要实现新能源汽车推广目标又要保证补贴政策合理退坡的双重现实要求。本文依据当前中央政府为新能源汽车提供固定补贴,地方政府提供配套比例补贴以及制定价格补贴比例上限的现实情形,综合考虑新能源汽车成本、充电桩建设情况、消费者初始效用、中央政府补贴等因素对地方新能源汽车推广的影响,构建了地方政府为实现既定新能源汽车推广目标的最优补贴策略模型。研究表明:(1)对于不同效用水平的消费者,地方政府价格补贴比例上限和配套比例补贴对新能源汽车零售价格所起的作用不同;(2)地方政府补贴政策只有在小于或等于其最优配套比例或价格补贴比例上限时才会对新能源汽车推广产生正向影响。最后,还结合北京新能源汽车推广的实际情况进行了数值模拟,给出了在不同新能源汽车成本、充电桩建设情况、消费者初始效用下北京市政府为实现新能源汽车推广目标的最优补贴策略。数值模拟结果表明,当前北京新能源汽车存在地方配套比例过高、价格补贴比例上限过高等问题。在后补贴时代,北京市政府可依据新能源汽车成本下降、充电设施逐步完善、消费者初始效用提升等因素变化,对补贴进行适当退坡。数值模拟表明,所构造的最优补贴策略模型对后补贴时代地方政府新能源汽车补贴政策的制定具有较高的参考价值。     

Risk of commodity price,production cost and time to build in resource economics

Real option theory has been extensively applied to natural resource extraction modeling and risk management, which proves to be a significantly more powerful method than the traditional ones such as discounted cash flows. This research attempts to extend a proposed real option model based on optimized price threshold strategy for gold mining operations. Besides exploring the risk from commodity price, the research also examines the effects of a declining stochastic production costs, due to technology innovation in the long term. The extended real option model further examines how the time to build a gold mine can impact the optimized price threshold strategy. Sensitivity analysis and numerical evidence show that, (1) innovation in mining technology will boost the mine’s profitability and also shift the optimized price threshold; (2) mining operators can hedge a significant level of risk by treating time to build properly. Further discussions are provided on mining investment strategy and policy implication for resource extraction.     

碳排放权交易试点是否促进了对外直接投资?

环境规制与跨国投资之间的关系一直是学术界关注的焦点。作为重要的环境规制手段,碳排放权交易试点的推进标志着我国环境规制强度的增强。对外直接投资(OFDI)作为最典型的跨国经济活动之一,是中国"走出去"战略的重要组成部分。近年来,中国对外直接投资存量与净额都呈现稳定的上升趋势,与此同时,环境规制强度也在不断提升。中国对外直接投资是否受到国内环境规制加强的影响值得探讨,而2013年正式启动碳排放权交易试点为解决此问题提供了一个准自然实验场景。基于此,文章使用中国30个省级行政单位2010—2019年的面板数据,以北京、上海、广东、天津、湖北、重庆和福建开展的碳排放权交易试点作为准自然实验,运用双重差分法(DID)研究碳排放权交易试点的开展是否提升了对外直接投资水平。研究结论表明,碳排放权交易试点能够显著提升我国对外直接投资水平。且该结论在平行趋势检验、合成控制法(SCM)、安慰剂检验等检验后依旧稳健。此外,潜在机制的研究发现碳排放权交易试点满足"污染避难所假说"和"波特假说",进而促进了对外直接投资水平的提升。通过净效应的初步讨论,文章发现"污染避难所假说"仍旧在目前占据主导地位。研究结论意味着:(1)未来要继续推进全国统一的碳排放权交易市场建设;(2)持续探索激发碳排放权交易试点对创新产生的激励效应;(3)完善投资便利化的制度与措施,搭建国际技术交易或信息平台等。一方面促进我国生态环境的改善,另一方面促进对外投资水平的增质提量。     

Risk identification and regulatory system design for the carbon market

Currently, the global carbon trading systems are fragmented and belong to different governments or are under the jurisdiction of different regions, resulting in a series of new problems, such as how to link dispersed trading systems, how to compare the emission reduction of various markets and other issues. Since the development of the international carbon market is relatively immature with uncertain life expectancy and volatility during its short history, and there is a lack of quantitative data on the long-term record, the market could provide few risk management tools. Meanwhile, with the launches of China’s regional carbon trading pilots in seven provinces since 2013 and combined with the national voluntary emission trading system, carbon trading will become an important mechanism for China in achieving its emission reduction target. In the first stage, the carbon finance market is at least faced with mechanism design risks, market supply risks and compliance risks. Therefore, to secure the development of the carbon market and for public interest, relevant government departments of China should identify the risks facing the market and should make the basic principles and goals, such as ensuring effective trading and pricing mechanisms to avoid fraud and price manipulation, and balancing transparency and confidentiality of information. Consequently, the governments should develop a comprehensive carbon finance regulatory system covering regulatory legislation, regulatory institutions and their authorities, regulatory scope as well as regulatory objects.     

碳价格对中国工业外商直接投资的潜在影响

作为未来一段时期市场化减排政策的重要抓手,中国将于2017年启动全国碳交易市场。通过施加碳价格,碳市场将对不同行业的生产成本产生影响。那么,碳价格对中国工业外商直接投资的影响如何?是否有助于优化吸引FDI的行业结构?这正是本文关注的焦点。为了克服碳价格数据不足的问题,本文构建了碳价格与煤炭、天然气等五种能源价格之间的映射关系,并采用1999—2013年36个工业行业的面板数据,估计了能源成本对外商直接投资相对规模和绝对规模的影响,并通过碳市场不同价格水平与能源成本之间的映射关系,对工业行业吸引FDI的潜在影响进行了反事实测算。论文的主要结果有:(1)碳价格与能源成本之间的映射关系存在行业异质性,这是由不同工业行业的能源消费结构差异所致。(2)能源成本对整体FDI的规模不存在显著负向影响。其对中国吸引FDI的相对规模和绝对规模的影响在高耗能行业和非高耗能行业间存在显著的差异。(3)不同碳价格水平对中国工业吸引FDI的相对规模、绝对规模和行业结构都将产生显著影响。碳价格将显著降低高耗能行业的FDI规模,但对非高耗能行业的外资规模具有促进作用;对FDI的绝对规模的影响较之相对规模更显著。碳价格为50元时,高耗能行业FDI的相对规模累积下降2%—7%,绝对规模累积下降3%—13%;非高耗能行业FDI的相对规模累积增加1.5%—3%,绝对规模累积增加0.1%—0.3%。上述结果说明,全国碳市场建立对中国工业吸引FDI的整体规模不会产生显著的负面影响,但有助于提高非高耗能行业的FDI流入,并降低高耗能行业的FDI流入,优化工业吸引外资的行业结构。     

碳排放交易制度与企业创新质量:抑制还是促进

近年来,有关环境规制与企业创新关系的研究大量涌现,但基于中国碳排放交易制度,尤其是从微观企业层面考察碳排放交易制度对企业创新质量影响的研究仍有待丰富和深化。有鉴于此,采用2008—2016年中国A股上市公司面板数据,以专利申请总量表示创新数量,以发明专利申请和实用新型专利申请分别表示高质量创新和低质量创新,进而采用DID模型构建中国碳排放交易制度对企业创新质量影响的准自然实验框架。同时,为增强实证结果的解释力,采用PSM-DID方法对实证结果进行了稳健性检验、异质性检验以及政府补贴方式的创新激励机制检验。结果表明:①碳排放交易制度在提高"处理组"企业创新数量的同时,也能促使企业兼顾创新质量,但从影响程度来看,碳排放交易制度对低质量创新促进作用更为强劲。②从企业所有权和规模异质性来看,碳排放交易制度主要对国有股份企业和大规模企业创新质量有促进作用,而对民营企业和小规模企业进行高质量创新的诱导力度较小或不显著。③机制检验结果表明,政府补贴政策能够有效弥补碳排放交易制度对高质量创新诱导乏力的不足,但创新激励效果因政府补贴方式而异,其中政府事前补贴优于政府事后补偿;此外,碳排放交易制度通过促使政府为被规制企业提供更多的政府事前补贴,从而有效缓解企业"遵循成本"压力,推动企业转向高质量创新。由此认为,加大对小规模民营企业高质量创新补贴、采取更具灵活性和针对性的创新补贴方式,应是进一步助力碳排放交易制度诱导企业转向高质量创新的政策制定方向。     

工业用地出让、引资质量底线竞争与环境污染——基于252个地级市面板数据的经验分析

在工业化进程中,中国地方政府利用其掌控的土地资源进行大规模的招商引资活动,其中工业用地出让成为其招商引资的法宝。为了在激烈的竞争中获得某些优势,它们有时甚至不惜降低引资质量底线,从而引来一些高污染、高能耗的工业企业,并带来日益严重的环境污染问题。论文利用工业用地协议出让把工业用地出让、引资质量底线竞争与环境污染三者联系起来,并运用2004—2013年全国252个地级市的土地出让数据、经济数据、环境数据来分析工业用地出让对中国经济和环境的影响。通过协议出让面积对固定资产投资、工业总产值、GDP和地方财政收入进行回归来分析采用协议出让方式引入投资项目的质量;通过协议出让面积对工业二氧化硫和工业废水排放量进行回归来分析协议出让方式对当地环境污染的影响。实证结果表明,当期及前期的工业用地协议出让面积与固定资产投资、工业总产值、GDP、地方财政收入、税收等均呈负相关关系,与当地污染物的排放量呈正相关关系。换言之,地方政府若试图用协议出让方式增加工业用地出让面积来促进地方经济增长,将得不偿失,在短期内虽然对地方经济有一定的促进作用,但在长期内会对地方经济和环境造成危害。为了实现经济和生态环境的可持续发展,应完善地方政府的考核方式,调整以GDP为主的政绩考核机制,综合当地环境状况和除经济增长外的其他社会性服务指标作为考核指标;中央政府应该加强对地方政府的监管,严格规范工业用地出让,优化土地资源配置,提升引资质量;地方政府应加强对当地企业的监管,并严格执行环保标准。     

碳交易背景下中国石化行业2020年碳减排目标情景分析

石化行业作为中国八大典型高碳排放产业之一,也是碳市场参与的重要行业.在国家2020年碳排放强度目标的约束下,客观评价其行业减碳的压力,对于政府部门科学制定各个行业碳排放配额的分配方案具有重要支撑作用.同时,亦对于通过低碳转型升级实现行业的可持续发展和支撑国家的工业减排目标具有理论和现实意义.本文针对石化行业9个子部门,结合我国经济发展的总体背景和趋势以及石化行业的相关数据,以2010年为基准情景,在2020年国家碳排放强度分别下降45％和50％的减排约束目标下,构建了一个动态CGE模型——PCCGE,借助GAMS软件模拟分析,预测了到2020年国家和石化行业经济总量、能源消费结构和碳排放量及碳强度等的变化趋势.研究结果表明,相比基准情景,在45％、50％的碳强度减排目标下,国家和石化行业的经济增长、能源消费结构和碳排放强度等指标分别受到一定程度影响,其中,50％的减排目标对国家整体经济增速影响更为明显;对煤炭、石油这两种高碳能源的需求产生了较显著的约束效应;相比国家45％-50％的低碳发展目标,石化行业减碳承受压力达到60.63％至64.78％,面临着艰巨的减排任务与挑战.最后,文章结合低碳市场化背景提出了如下建议:科学预测典型离碳行业的减碳潜力,谨慎应对石化等行业企业参与碳市场交易过程中碳配额指标的制定与分配;充分利用技术创新和能源结构调整等战略,提高可再生能源的使用规模,促进能源消耗结构的优化和调整;构建石化行业节能低碳技术产学研协同创新体系,解决共性节能技术瓶颈;实施石化行业企业低碳发展战略,建设完善碳排放管理体系是行业节能减碳的重要手段.