Search formAdvanced search

Further publications: Mark Sommer (14 hits)

in: Theodoros Zachariadis, Janet E. Milne, Mikael S. Andersen, Hope Ashiabor, Economic Instruments for a Low-carbon Future
Critical Issues in Environmental Taxation, 2020, pp.127-140,
Silvia Scherhaufer, Anna Happenhofer, Ina Meyer, Florian Part, Mark Sommer, Peter Beigl
in: Sardinia 2019 – 17th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. Proceedings
Book chapters, contributions to collected volumes, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, November 2019
The decarbonisation of the energy and mobility sector is in progress, making products such as photovoltaic and wind power plants but also electric vehicles relevant in terms of amounts installed or registered in Austria. These three product groups contain mass relevant components such as metals, glass or plastics but also valuable materials in low quantities which require adequate recycling in terms of resource efficiency and prevention of pollution with harmful substances. This conference paper presents a baseline assessment of main product types and their material composition used in Austria and the current status of recycling.
Vortrag, Limassol, 25.-27.9.2019
This paper applies a DYNK (Dynamic New Keynesian) model to compare the traditional environmental tax reform for greenhouse gas emissions with a taxation scheme that taxes greenhouse gas emissions embodied in consumption within the framework of a unilateral policy of the EU 27. The embodied emissions of different commodities are taxed independently of their origin. The greenhouse gas tax rates applied are identical and new revenues are in both cases recycled via lower social security contributions of employers. The article shows the macroeconomic results, driven by the different impact of the taxation schemes on price competitiveness of EU 27 firms. These differences drive the leakage and show negative leakage in the case of taxing embodied greenhouse gas emissions. Both taxation schemes are also regressive for household incomes emphasising the importance of the choice of revenue recycling. In terms of emission reduction, we find the taxation of emissions embodied in consumption less effective.
in: Roland Pomberger, et al., Recy & DepoTech 2018: Recycling & Abfallverwertung, Abfallwirtschaft & Ressourcenmanagement, Deponietechnik & Altlasten, Internationale Abfallwirtschaft & Spezielle Recyclingthemen. Konferenzband zur 14. Recy & DepoTech-Konferenz
Book chapters, contributions to collected volumes, Leoben, November 2018, pp.77-84
CO2-Importzölle als Begleitmaßnahme für das EU-Emissionshandelssystem galten aufgrund der möglichen internationalen Vergeltungsmaßnahmen und Klagen vor der WTO bisher als No-Go. Die durch US-Präsident Trump und den Brexit entstandene Bewegung in Sachen Zölle wie auch die laufende Diskussion um alternative Finanzierungsquellen für das EU-Budget könnten es allerdings erlauben, CO2-Zölle auf die EU-Agenda zu setzen, wie dieser Beitrag zeigt.
The need to reform EU funding and recent political developments such as Brexit and the withdrawal of the USA from the 2015 Paris climate agreement could revitalise the debate about the introduction of border carbon adjustments (BCA) for the European emission trading system (ETS). The introduction of a BCA would allow the EU to phase out current carbon leakage provisions of the ETS and to auction off all emission allowances, thus rendering the ETS a more effective unilateral tool to price and reduce carbon emissions. By using a dynamic new Keynesian (DYNK) model, we estimate that a BCA for the ETS would generate substantial and stable revenues. Given different assumptions about the development of the carbon intensity of non-EU production and different BCA designs we find that estimated revenues would suffice to finance between a third and all of current EU expenditures by the year 2027, thus allowing EU countries to reduce their current contributions to the EU budget accordingly. Administered at the EU borders a BCA would represent a sustainability-oriented instrument to finance the EU allowing EU member countries to cut more distortionary taxes such as those on labour, thereby increasing growth- and employment-friendliness of taxation. The proposed measure could thus contribute to tackle both environmental and fiscal challenges currently facing the EU.
in: Stephanie Thiel, Elisabeth Thomé-Kozmiensky, Daniel Goldmann, Recycling und Rohstoffe
Recycling und Rohstoffe, 2018, (11), pp.49-63,
This paper calculates the carbon footprint of private consumption in the EU 27 by five groups of household income, using a fully fledged macroeconomic input-output model covering 59 industries and five groups of household income for the EU 27. Due to macroeconomic feedback mechanisms, this methodology – besides induced intermediate demand – also quantifies: 1. private consumption induced in the other household groups, 2. impacts on other endogenous final demand components, and 3. negative feedback effects due to output price effects of household demand. The carbon footprint is calculated separately for the consumption vector of each of the five income groups. The simulation results yield a non-linear income elasticity of direct and indirect emissions at each income level: the value of the direct footprint income elasticity decreases from 1.32 (first quintile) to 0.69 (fourth quintile). The value of the indirect footprint income elasticity is always below unity and decreases from 0.89 to 0.62. The results in general reveal a relative decoupling effect: the share of the top income group in income (45 percent) is much larger than its share in the carbon footprint (37 percent) and vice versa for the bottom income group (6 percent in income and 8 percent in footprint).