@article{FranksKalkuhlLessmann2023,
  author    = {Franks, Max and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Lessmann, Kai},
  title     = {Optimal pricing for carbon dioxide removal under inter-regional leakage},
  series = {Journal of environmental economics and management},
  volume    = {117},
  journal   = {Journal of environmental economics and management},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {1096-0449},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102769},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) moves atmospheric carbon to geological or land-based sinks. In a first-best setting, the optimal use of CDR is achieved by a removal subsidy that equals the optimal carbon tax and marginal damages. We derive second-best policy rules for CDR subsidies and carbon taxes when no global carbon price exists but a national government implements a unilateral climate policy. We find that the optimal carbon tax differs from an optimal CDR subsidy because of carbon leakage and a balance of resource trade effect. First, the optimal removal subsidy tends to be larger than the carbon tax because of lower supply-side leakage on fossil resource markets. Second, net carbon exporters exacerbate this wedge to increase producer surplus of their carbon resource producers, implying even larger removal subsidies. Third, net carbon importers may set their removal subsidy even below their carbon tax when marginal environmental damages are small, to appropriate producer surplus from carbon exporters.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SurethKalkuhlEdenhoferetal.2023,
  author    = {Sureth, Michael and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Edenhofer, Ottmar and Rockstr{\"o}m, Johan},
  title     = {A welfare economic approach to planetary boundaries},
  series = {Jahrb{\"u}cher f{\"u}r National{\"o}konomie und Statistik},
  volume    = {243},
  journal   = {Jahrb{\"u}cher f{\"u}r National{\"o}konomie und Statistik},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {De Gruyter Oldenbourg},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0021-4027},
  doi       = {10.1515/jbnst-2022-0022},
  pages     = {477 -- 542},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {The crises of both the climate and the biosphere are manifestations of the imbalance between human extractive, and polluting activities and the Earth's regenerative capacity. Planetary boundaries define limits for biophysical systems and processes that regulate the stability and life support capacity of the Earth system, and thereby also define a safe operating space for humanity on Earth. Budgets associated to planetary boundaries can be understood as global commons: common pool resources that can be utilized within finite limits. Despite the analytical interpretation of planetary boundaries as global commons, the planetary boundaries framework is missing a thorough integration into economic theory. We aim to bridge the gap between welfare economic theory and planetary boundaries as derived in the natural sciences by presenting a unified theory of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis. Our pragmatic approach aims to overcome shortcomings of the practical applications of CEA and CBA to environmental problems of a planetary scale. To do so, we develop a model framework and explore decision paradigms that give guidance to setting limits on human activities. This conceptual framework is then applied to planetary boundaries. We conclude by using the realized insights to derive a research agenda that builds on the understanding of planetary boundaries as global commons.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MontroneSteckelKalkuhl2022,
  author    = {Montrone, Lorenzo and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Kalkuhl, Matthias},
  title     = {The type of power capacity matters for economic development},
  series = {Resource and energy economics},
  volume    = {69},
  journal   = {Resource and energy economics},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0928-7655},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.reseneeco.2022.101313},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {We examine the relationship between different types of power investments and regional economic dynamics. We construct a novel panel dataset combining data on regional GDP and power capacity additions for different technologies between 1960 and 2015, which covers 65\% of the global power capacity that has been installed in this period. We use an event study design to identify the effect of power capacity addition on GDP per capita, exploiting the fact that the exact amount of power capacity coming online each year is determined by random construction delays. We find evidence that GDP per capita increases by 0.2\% in the 6 years around the coming online of 100 MW coal-fired power capacity. We find similar effects for hydropower capacity, but not for any other type of power capacity. The positive effects are regionally bounded and stronger for projects on new sites (green-field). The magnitude of this effect might not be comparable to the total external costs of building new coal-fired power capacity, yet our results help to explain why policymakers favor coal investments for spurring regional growth.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{KalkuhlFlachslandKnopfetal.2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kalkuhl, Matthias and Flachsland, Christian and Knopf, Brigitte and Amberg, Maximilian and Bergmann, Tobias and Kellner, Maximilian and St{\"u}ber, Sophia and Haywood, Luke and Roolfs, Christina and Edenhofer, Ottmar},
  title     = {Effects of the energy price crisis on households in Germany},
  publisher = {Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  pages     = {35},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GrunerFussKalkuhletal.2022,
  author    = {Gruner, Friedemann and Fuß, Sabine and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Minx, Jan C. and Strefler, Jessica and Merfort, Anne},
  title     = {Wie CO2-Entnahmen helfen k{\"o}nnen, die Klimaziele zu erreichen},
  series = {Klima und Recht},
  volume    = {1},
  journal   = {Klima und Recht},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {C.H. Beck},
  address   = {M{\"u}nchen},
  issn      = {2750-0551},
  pages     = {18 -- 21},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {de}
}
@techreport{KalkuhlFlachslandKnopfetal.2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kalkuhl, Matthias and Flachsland, Christian and Knopf, Brigitte and Amberg, Maximilian and Bergmann, Tobias and Kellner, Maximilian and St{\"u}ber, Sophia and Haywood, Luke and Roolfs, Christina and Edenhofer, Ottmar},
  title     = {Auswirkungen der Energiepreiskrise auf Haushalte in Deutschland},
  publisher = {Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  pages     = {37},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {de}
}
@techreport{SteckelMissbachOhlendorfetal.2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Steckel, Jan Christoph and Missbach, Leonard and Ohlendorf, Nils and Feindt, Simon and Kalkuhl, Matthias},
  title     = {Effects of the energy price crisis on European households},
  publisher = {Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  pages     = {30},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{KalkuhlAmbergBergmannetal.2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kalkuhl, Matthias and Amberg, Maximilian and Bergmann, Tobias and Knopf, Brigitte and Edenhofer, Ottmar},
  title     = {Gaspreisdeckel, Mehrwertsteuersenkung, Energiepauschale},
  publisher = {Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {de}
}
@techreport{KellnerAmbergBergmannetal.2022,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kellner, Maximilian and Amberg, Maximilian and Bergmann, Tobias and Roolfs, Christina and Kalkuhl, Matthias},
  title     = {Entlastungspakete f{\"u}r Energiepreisanstiege},
  publisher = {Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) gGmbH},
  address   = {Berlin},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.6617130},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2022},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{DiluisoWalkManychetal.2021,
  author    = {Diluiso, Francesca and Walk, Paula and Manych, Niccolo and Cerutti, Nicola and Chipiga, Vladislav and Workman, Annabelle and Ayas, Ceren and Cui, Ryna Yiyun and Cui, Diyang and Song, Kaihui and Banisch, Lucy A. and Moretti, Nikolaj and Callaghan, Max W. and Clarke, Leon and Creutzig, Felix and Hilaire, Jerome and Jotzo, Frank and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Lamb, William F. and L{\"o}schel, Andreas and M{\"u}ller-Hansen, Finn and Nemet, Gregory F. and Oei, Pao-Yu and Sovacool, Benjamin K. and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Thomas, Sebastian and Wiseman, John and Minx, Jan C.},
  title     = {Coal transitions - part 1},
  series = {Environmental research letters},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {Environmental research letters},
  number    = {11},
  publisher = {Institute of Physics Publishing (IOP)},
  address   = {Bristol},
  issn      = {1748-9326},
  doi       = {10.1088/1748-9326/ac1b58},
  pages     = {40},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {A rapid coal phase-out is needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, but is hindered by serious challenges ranging from vested interests to the risks of social disruption. To understand how to organize a global coal phase-out, it is crucial to go beyond cost-effective climate mitigation scenarios and learn from the experience of previous coal transitions. Despite the relevance of the topic, evidence remains fragmented throughout different research fields, and not easily accessible. To address this gap, this paper provides a systematic map and comprehensive review of the literature on historical coal transitions. We use computer-assisted systematic mapping and review methods to chart and evaluate the available evidence on historical declines in coal production and consumption. We extracted a dataset of 278 case studies from 194 publications, covering coal transitions in 44 countries and ranging from the end of the 19th century until 2021. We find a relatively recent and rapidly expanding body of literature reflecting the growing importance of an early coal phase-out in scientific and political debates. Previous evidence has primarily focused on the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany, while other countries that experienced large coal declines, like those in Eastern Europe, are strongly underrepresented. An increasing number of studies, mostly published in the last 5 years, has been focusing on China. Most of the countries successfully reducing coal dependency have undergone both demand-side and supply-side transitions. This supports the use of policy approaches targeting both demand and supply to achieve a complete coal phase-out. From a political economy perspective, our dataset highlights that most transitions are driven by rising production costs for coal, falling prices for alternative energies, or local environmental concerns, especially regarding air pollution. The main challenges for coal-dependent regions are structural change transformations, in particular for industry and labor. Rising unemployment is the most largely documented outcome in the sample. Policymakers at multiple levels are instrumental in facilitating coal transitions. They rely mainly on regulatory instruments to foster the transitions and compensation schemes or investment plans to deal with their transformative processes. Even though many models suggest that coal phase-outs are among the low-hanging fruits on the way to climate neutrality and meeting the international climate goals, our case studies analysis highlights the intricate political economy at work that needs to be addressed through well-designed and just policies.},
  language  = {en}
}