Transcript スライド 1

An Environmental SAM and
SAM-based CGE Modelling for
Environmental Policy Problems
Noritoshi Ariyoshi
Faculty of Environmental Studies
Nagasaki University
Itsuo Sakuma
School of Economics
Senshu University
Akihiko Taniguchi
Graduate School of Economics
Senshu University
International Workshop for
Interactive Analysis on Economy and Environment
Cabinet Office, the Government of Japan
4th March 2006
CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. A general explanation of Japanese NAMEA
(Hybrid Accounts)
3. From NAMEA to a SEEA-type SAM with monetary
valuation of environmental pressures
4. A CGE analysis

5. Concluding remarks



1. Introduction




The purpose of this paper is twofold. Concerning
(1) Data aspects, we attempt to
Construct a DATA ENVIRONMENTAL SAM from
Japanese NAMEA(*) compiled by ESRI.
DATA ENVIRONMENTAL SAM is a SEEA-ver. IV.2
type SAM(**), which includes monetary valuation of
environmental pressures, in particular, the estimation
of imputed environmental cost.
(*)”NAMEA” is an acronym for National Accounting Matrix Including Environmental Accounts.
(**)”SEEA” is an acronym for System for Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting.
1. Introduction(continued)




Concerning (2) Modelling aspects, we attempt to
Conduct SAM-based CGE analyses.
To do this, MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL SAM will be
created to accommodate a specific general
equilibrium modelling structure.
Using this SAM as a base equilibrium data, various
simulation (comparative static analyses) will be
conducted so as to evaluate policy changes etc.
involved.
Introduction (continued)

NAMEA

DATA ENVIRONMENTAL SAM

MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL SAM

ENVIRONMENTAL CGE ANALYSIS
1. Introduction (continued):
An illustration of a SAM-based CGE
Evaluation of the
Policy Change etc.
Data
Modelling
Calibration,
Base Model SAM
Replication
Experiment
(Policy
Change etc.)
SAM after an
Experiment
2. A General Explanation of Japanese
NAMEA (Hybrid Accounts)
1) It is based on the original NAMEA* by the
Netherlands, and estimates for 90, 95, and 00
2) Twofold parallel structure: national accounting
matrix (NAM) at monetary term and
environmental accounts (EA) at physical term.
3) Twofold structure of EA : substance accounts
and environmental problem accounts.
Figure 2.1 Sketch of Japanese NAMEA
Opening stocks
Opening stocks
Decrease in land use
Hidden material flows
A-B
C
Environmental accounts
(on the quantity basis)
Hidden material flows
B
Changes in land use
Input of natural assets
Pollutant’s contribution to environmental problems
Increase in land uses
A
Accumulation to environment
Disposal of pollutants
Increase in natural asets
Emission of pollutants
National accounting matrix
(on the monetary basis)
Changes in natural assets
Environmental problem
accounts
Substances accounts
Environmental indicators
Closing stocks
Closing stocks
D
Table 2.1 Japanese NAMEA (2000) - Summary Table : Cells for environmental flow data
areas
: Cells for environmental indicator
Distribution & use (sectors)
5
Taxes (tax categories)
6
-0.2
Capital (sectors)
Non-financial assets (kinds)
7
5.1
Rest of the world
9
Energy (3)
Forests (volume)
Water (water use)
Fishery resources
(marine products)
Hidden material flows
Waste (2)
T-P＆T-N
Other lands
Wastewater
1,017,275 36,609
National
economy
369.8
221,424
13.0
82.6
370.0
44.2
38.7
35,993
汚染物質の排出
Emission of pollutants
11b
11c
11d
11e
11f
11g
11h
11i
11j
11k
11l
Opening stocks
-
-
-
-
-
21,371
-
-
-
Pressures on natural resources and
restoration of natural resources
0
0
64
ROW
11.9
7.4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
40
0
0
0 72,841
-
Restoration of Natural resources
10b
Ｂ
10c
Processing of pollutants and
exploitationof natural resources
10d
0
Quality T-P＆T-N 10e
of water Wastewater 10f
0
Contribution to global environmental issues
94,246 Others
-
820
820 SO2
-
2,032
1,422 Others
466 T-P & T-N
835
Processing and recycle
of pollutants
17 Wastewate
55,514 Final disposition of waste
766
Ａ－Ｂ
10g
405,319
Energy(3)
10h
199
16,813
Forest (volume)
10i
18,019
81,241
10j
87,000
0
10k
5,736
Exploitation of
domestic natural
resources
CO2
1,238,699
1,238,699
36,693
Waste(2)
10l
Exploitation of ROW's
natural resources
caused by imports
55,514
-199
16,813
Pressures on
environment
5,883
-87,000
0
-5,736
-5,883
54,822 Changes in Forests
Chamges in
-87,000
water esources
Changes in
fishery resources -5,736
Making indicators
-40
-2,826
Ｄ
Environmental indicators
3-
1,000
ｔonnes
-
-199 54,822
21,172
PJ
-
-PO4 .
Unit
-
-
3-
-
17 55,514
-PO4 .
1,000 ｔ
Unit
Closing stocks
466
1,000t
-SO2
1,000 ｔ
1 million
ｔonnes
1,000 ha
1,000 ha
1,000 ｔ
1 million
ｍ3
1,000ｍ3
PJ
Billion Yen
1,000 ｔ
2,829.3
1,332,945 2,242
1,000
tonnes
-CO2
Environmental indicators
1,000 ｔ
Unit
Hidden material flows in
ROW caused by imports
1,000 ｔ
CA
-92.9
1,000 t
-NOX
1,000t
-SO2
Closing Stocks
Hidden material flows
in domestic area
1,000 t
-N2O
R
1,000
tonnes
-CO2
Reconciliation/indicators
Changes in
natural
resources
-40 Agricultural land
Changes in
land use
40
-1,095
Contribution to regional
environmental issues
-199 Depletion of energy resources
Ｃ
54,822 -81,241
2,826
1,095
-
4,950 25,370
The potential contributions to Global warming, acidification and
Eutrophication are expressed in GWP, AEQ and EEQ, respectively.
Global Warming Potencials (GWP) CO2 ： 1, N2O：310, CH4：21
Acid Equivalents (AEQ) Nox ： 0.7, So2：１, NH3
Eutrophication Equivalents (EEQ) P ： 3.06, N：0.42
Changes in land use
Ａ
-40
0
36.4
0.0
143 346 406
-1.0
44.2
47.9
45
0.0
-98.0
468.0
775 1,889 490 360 424,840
20
10a
10n
11a
55.3
134.4
434.9 369.8
941.5
8
Hidden material flows
X2
Others
40
-1,095
Hidden material flows
-87,000 -5,736
-
-
-
-40
40 -1,095
-
4,910 25,380
1 million
ｔonnes
4
10m
X1
1,000
ha
Value added (categories)
Land Agricultural land
use Others (5)
10l 10m 10n
Land for housing
Others (2)
10k
Fish
SO2
10j
Water
Others (5)
10i
Forests
CO2
10h
1,000
ha
3
Pollutions
10g
1,000
ｔonnes
Final consumption (purposes)
Substances
Natural resources
10d 10e 10f
1 million
ｍ3
2
Water resources
(wateruse)
Fishery resources
(marine products)
10c
Changes in natural resources
Regional
1,000
ｍ3
1
Production (activities)
Air
Goods & services (products)
Acidifi- SO2
cation Others(2)
10b
2,885.8
OA
Green- CO2
house Others(5)
10a
Energy resources
9
Waste
Rest of the world
8
Wastewater
Non-financial assets (kinds)
7
Eutrophication
Capital (sectors)
6
Acidification
Taxes (tax categories)
5
Changes in
land uses
Global
Greenhouse effects
Distribution & use (sectors)
4
Hidden material flows
Value added (categories)
3
Quality
of water
Othrs (5)
Final consumption (purpose)
2
Greenhouse effects Acidification
Agricultural lamd
Production (activities)
1
Air
Land use
Natural resources
Changes of natural resources
in ROW caused by import
Opening stocks
Goods & services (products)
Account
(classification)
Environmental problems
Accumu. To env.
Substances
Pollutants
Accumulation of substances
to the environment
Material flows
Monetary flows
Note) This is a summary table of the attachment#1-3 of New System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting, Department of National Accounts, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), Cabinet Office of
Japan, 2004 (http://www.esri.cao.go.jp
3. From NAMEA to a SEEA-type SAM
with Monetary Valuation of
Environmental pressures


The estimation of imputed environmental cost
(maintenance cost in 93SEEA ver. IV.2) should be
considered to be highly important because it can
clarify what the government should do for the
environment.
Only imputed environmental costs the origin of which
is industries (=market producers) are considered.
Because it may be necessary to take the extension
of production boundary into consideration in order to
deal with the consumption-related costs.
The Estimation of Imputed
Environmental Cost



Except for CO 2 , the assumption of “zero-emission”
is posited in order to calculate imputed
environmental cost about each environmental
pressure category.
Concerning CO 2 , the emission level 6% below that
in 1990 is assumed according to the Kyoto Protocol.
Two summary tables are on two slides below, giving
imputed environmental cost by sources and by
environmental pressure types.
Table 3.1 a SEEA-type SAM with Monetary Valuation of Environmental Pressures (1995)
Production (activities)
3
5
973.1
accumulation
(institutional sectors)
6
4051.6
Other produced assets (types)
Environmental
impacts
33372.6
Waste
Eco-margin
9
10
11
12
13
14
6105.5
134225.8
45230.1
-204.2
-88912.7
108.7
369345.0
130830.9
19372.2
57549.1
-214.4
5901.3
Imputed environmental cost
valuated bymaintenance cost
approach
8
45313.1
Deterioration of non-produced
assets by production activities
9
10
Quality of water
(T-P, T-N, waste water)
11
Rest of the world
458525.0
7
Discharge of residuals
(CO2, SOX, NOX, SPM etc.)
Waste
(final disposition)
Eco-margin ((-)sum of imputed
environmental costs)
Rest of
the world
349633.2
4
Environmental protection
facilities (types)
349633.1
8
Non-produced
assets
(types)
922938.0
Use and distribution of income
（institutional sectors）
Non-produced assets (types)
Imputed environmental costs
2
431040.2
Generation of income
（items of value added）
produced
assets
Capital accounts
Income
accounts
Final consumption(purpose)
1
Other
produced
assets
Imputed environmental costs
Environmental impacts
Quality
of water
Use and
Goods & Productio
Final
Generation of
accumulatio
distribution of
Environmental
services
n
consumption
income
n
income
protection
(products) (activities) (purposes)
（items of
(institutional
（institutional
facilities
value added）
sectors)
sectors）
(types)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Account
(classification)
Goods & services (products)
Capital accounts
Non-produec assets
Air pollutions
Income accounts
10032.8
6969.8
12
13
14
38272.4
-10032.8
(-) sum of imputed environmental costs valuated
bymaintenance cost approach
-6969.8
2240.4
-2240.4
-19243.0
19243.0
171.8
15880.6
10171.8
(-) sum of deterioration of
non-produced assets by
production activities
-10386.2
Industries
Eco-margins
(Billion yen)
Distribution of
Eco-margin
(%)
Distribution
of Value
Added (%)
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
355.9
1.8
2.0
Mining
161.7
0.8
0.2
Food products and beverages
335.2
1.7
2.8
38.0
0.2
0.3
Pulp, paper and paper products
118.1
0.6
0.7
Chemicals
556.9
2.9
2.1
Petroleum and coal products
117.3
0.6
1.2
Non-metallic mineral products
513.6
2.7
1.0
Iron and steel
401.8
2.1
1.3
60.4
0.3
0.4
1141.2
5.9
10.7
Other Manufacturing
409.2
2.1
4.1
Construction
917.3
4.8
8.7
Electricity, gas and water supply
669.0
3.5
2.9
1634.5
8.5
16.3
640.5
3.3
6.3
Real estate
1257.9
6.5
12.8
Transport and communications
7948.3
41.3
7.6
Service activities
1966.2
10.2
18.8
Total Industries
19243.0
100.0
100.2
Textiles
Non-ferrous metals
Fabricated metal products and Machinery
Wholesale and retail trade
Finance and insurance
Imputed
Environmental
Cost
by origin of
Industries
Types of Environmental pressures
Green House
Effect
Discharges
Acidification
Water Use
Wastes
Total
Eco-margins
CO2
2498.2
N2O
11.7
CH4
4.5
HFCs
88.2
PFCs
50.7
SF6
73.7
NOX
4984.7
SO2
2261.6
SPM
59.4
T-P
3390.2
T-N
2552.2
Waste Water
1027.4
Final Disposition
2240.4
19243.0
Imputed
Environmental
Cost
By type of
environmental
pressures
4. A CGE Analysis: AGE and CGE

CGE (Computable General Equilibrium)
- has been developed in the history of World Bank’s
development modelling,
- was an extension of SAM multiplier analyses, and
naturally
- has been SAM-based.

AGE (Applied General Equilibrium)
- has been developed mainly by Scarf and his
successors.
4. A CGE Analysis: Main Model





Main feature: the environment is a production factor.
In our model, the environment will be considered as
a sink of a sort.
To use it, industries (not household) have to pay a
sum (emission permit).
The payment flow may be treated as if it is part of the
payment to capital factor in the base SAM.
The production part of the model is about the same
as that of typical world bank models except for the
treatment of environment. (See the next slide.)
COBB
DOUGLAS
CAP
LAB
MIXED
PROD.
FACTOR
ECOMARGIN
CES
DOM.
PROD.
Production Part of
the Model
LEONTIEF
INT.
INPUT
DOM.
GOOD
S.1
CES
EXPORTS
CET
DOM.
GOOD
S2
IMPORTS
COMPOSIT
E
GOOD
S
A thought behind the treatment


The domestic equilibrium price of the permit
will be determined at the level of imputed
environmental cost, estimated according to
the concept of “maintenance cost.”
Because firms do not pay for the permit if
they can reduce the emission by spending
actual environmental protection cost which
equals to maintenance cost and is less than
the permit value.
• MRS between ordinary factors and the
environment is determined by maintenance
cost
The
environment
Ordinary factors
Results(1)


The increase in the endowments of capital or labour
leads to the decrease in imputed environmental cost
(eco-margin). In one sense, the environment is illused just to save other factors.
But size of pressure of the 10% increase in each
factor endowment to the industries is different
industry by industry. Concerning labour, a large
decrease in eco-margin is found in steel, textiles,
construction, etc.
Results(2)
Concerning 10% increase in capital , a large
decrease in eco-margin is found in
Petroleum and coal products, etc.
 The 10% increase in labour endowment has
a larger effect on the reduction of eco-margin
than the same proportional increase in capital
endowment.(7.6% vs 3.1%)

Results(3)


The 10% increase in indirect tax rate will
reduce eco-margins of all industries, by
0.9%-1.4%.
The 10% increase in the price of
environment (tradable permit) will reduce
eco-margins by 0.5%-4.2%.
industries
% changes in
eco-margin due
to10% increase in
Labour
% changes in ecomargin due to 10%
increase in Capital
% changes in ecomargin due to 10%
increase in
environmental
factor price
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
-2.0
-8.1
-3.8
Mining
-6.5
-1.3
-2.8
Textiles
-11.7
2.2
-4.2
Pulp, paper and paper products
-6.4
-4.0
-4.1
Chemicals
-3.4
-5.3
-3.1
0.4
-10.3
-4.2
-7.0
-0.9
-2.9
-11.8
3.7
-3.6
Non-ferrous metals
-3.8
-0.4
-0.5
Fabricated metal products and Machinery
-7.6
-1.7
-4.1
-11.7
-3.1
-3.7
-2.4
-7.0
-3.6
-10.6
-6.5
-2.7
Finance and insurance
-5.3
-4.5
-3.9
Real estate
-0.2
-10.1
-4.0
Transport and communications
-7.2
0.2
-1.9
Service activities
-6.8
-3.3
-3.6
Petroleum and coal products
Non-metallic mineral products
Iron and steel
Construction
Electricity, gas and water supply
Wholesale and retail trade
A Model for an Ordinary Economy



In addition to the main model, an alternative model is
formulated to analyse an ordinary or actual economy
without environmental imputation.
Policy makers may be inclined to think that it is
necessary to introduce direct rather than indirect
regulation measures in order to reduce the imputed
environmental cost known quite immediately to zero.
In other words, the imputed cost in the main model
needs to be borne actually by the producers of the
alternative model. Thus, they must spend some
additional cost for the environmental protection
instead of discharging residuals.
Greened Economy GDP




On this assumption, the working of the economy will be
simulated.
Additionally, “greened economy GDP(NDP)” will be
calculated although “greened economy SAM” may be a
more meaningful concept.
The concept of “green GDP” is criticised in that it does
not take it into account that incurring additional cost
(maintenance cost) could lead to various percussions
and repercussions, so the concept does not reflect the
real situation.
Greened economy NDP may be equal to or greater
than green GDP depending on the assumptions made.
Green GDP and Greened Economy
GDP
GDP AT FACTOR COST
462,253.0
GDP AT MARKET PRICES
501,938.7
FIXED CAPITAL CONSUMPTION
89,116.9
NDP AT MARKET PRICES
412,821.8
ECO-MARGIN in the model
20,243.5
GREEN GDP
392,578.3
GREENED ECONOMY NDP (CASE 1)
407,862.4
at constant prices
GREENED ECONOMY NDP (CASE 2)
392,774.6
at constant prices
GREENED ECONOMY NDP (CASE 3)
400,739.7
at constant prices
Billion yen
CASE 1: Imputed environmental cost replaced by INTERMEDIATE INPUT
CASE 2: Imputed environmental cost replaced by FACTOR INPUT
CASE 3: Imputed environmental cost replaced by Mixed INTERMEDIATE and FACTOR INPUT
Concluding Remarks



A controversial problem over “direct” vs.
“indirect” regulations will be spotlighted by
this sort of modelling.
Whether any switch of techniques as well as
shift in industrial structure is triggered by the
policy change may be the key to the problem.
More disaggregated treatment about
environmental pressure categories may be
necessary.