JavaScript is Disabled
Your browser's JavaScript functionality is disabled. It has to be enabled to use this function of ConfTool. Here you can find information on how to enable JavaScript If you have any problems, please contact the organizers at info@iipf.org .
Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference.
Please select a date to show only sessions at that day. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Activate "Show Presentations" and enter your name in the search field in order to find your function (s), like presenter, discussant, chair.
Some information on the session logistics :
If not stated otherwise, the discussant is the following speaker, with the first speaker being the discussant of the last paper. The last speaker of each session is the session chair.
Presenters should speak for no more than 20 minutes, and discussants should limit their remarks to no more than 5 minutes. The remaining time should be reserved for audience questions and the presenter’s responses. We suggest following these guidelines also in the (less common) 3-paper sessions in a 2-hour slot, to allow participants to move between sessions. Discussants are encouraged to avoid summarizing the paper. By focusing on a few questions and comments, the discussants can help start a broader discussion with the audience.
Only registered participants can attend this conference. Further information available on the congress website https://www.usiu.ac.ke/iipf/ .
Venue address : United States International University Africa, USIU Road, Off Thika Road (Exit 7, Kenya), P.O. Box 14634, 00800 Nairobi, Kenya
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 9th Oct 2025, 01:15:39am EAT
D10: Climate Change Mitigation
Time:
Thursday, 21/Aug/2025:
4:30pm - 6:30pm
Session Chair: Dina Deborah Pomeranz , University of ZurichDiscussant 1: Ilias Matterne , Ghent UniversityDiscussant 2: Vedanth Nair , Institute for Fiscal StudiesDiscussant 3: Dina Deborah Pomeranz , University of ZurichDiscussant 4: Thomas Michael Lloyd , University of Michigan
Location: SS13
Presentations
Does It Matter That Carbon Taxes Are Regressive?
Ashley Craig2 , Thomas Lloyd 1 , Dylan Moore3
1 University of Michigan; 2 Australian National University; 3 University of Hawai’i
We ask how externalities should be taxed when redistribution is costly. In our model, the government raises revenue using distortionary income and commodity taxes. If more or less productive people have identical tastes for an externality-generating activity, the government optimally imposes a Pigouvian tax equal to marginal damage from the externality, regardless of whether the tax is regressive. But if regressivity partly reflects different preferences across incomes, the tax optimally deviates from the Pigouvian benchmark to help redistribute income efficiently. The overall tax may be higher or lower, and may even reverse sign relative to the externality. We derive sufficient statistics for optimal policy and use them to study carbon taxation in the US. Throughout most of the income distribution, our empirical results imply an optimal carbon tax below marginal damage, but this reverses for high earners. Allowing heterogeneity within and across incomes attenuates schedules toward the Pigouvian benchmark.
Assessing The Impact Of Carbon Taxation On Innovation: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis For Belgium
Ilias Matterne , Annelies Roggeman, Isabelle Verleyen
Ghent University, Belgium
This study examines the potential impacts of carbon taxation on Belgium’s economy, focusing on emissions reduction and fostering innovation. As a strong EU innovator, Belgium has yet to implement a carbon tax, despite falling short of its climate targets. Using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model calibrated with a detailed Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) for Belgium, the research explores varying carbon tax levels and revenue recycling strategies, including innovation subsidies and labour tax reductions. The model captures the dynamic interplay between economic activity, sectoral transitions, emissions, and R&D investments. By integrating innovation dynamics into the CGE framework, this study offers a forward-looking analysis of how carbon taxes can support technological progress and economic resilience. The results aim to provide actionable insights for policymakers designing equitable environmental policies that balance decarbonization with economic competitiveness.
How Do Sub-Saharan African Countries Tax Fuel And Vehicles? Evidence From A New Database
Vedanth Nair
Institute for Fiscal Studies, United Kingdom
Fuel and vehicle taxes are key revenue sources in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and play a role in addressing externalities such as congestion, air pollution, and road damage. This paper draws on a new database covering fuel and vehicle taxes in 38 SSA countries, tracking reforms since 2014. The findings show that these taxes are poorly aligned with environmental objectives: most revenue comes from up-front vehicle purchase taxes, which are least effective at targeting externalities from vehicle use. Since 2014, purchase taxes have grown in importance as fuel taxes have lagged behind inflation. While some purchase taxes include environmental elements—such as higher rates for vehicles with larger engines—most countries tax expensive but cleaner vehicles more than cheaper, dirtier ones. Cars face much higher taxes than buses and trucks, creating loopholes for vehicles on the boundary, such as pickup trucks.
Decreasing Emissions by Increasing Energy Access? Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment on Off-Grid Solar Lights
Adina Rom1 , Dina Pomeranz 2 , Isabel Günther1
1 ETH Zurich; 2 University of Zurich
Climate change and energy poverty in low- and middle-income countries are global challenges that are sometimes in tension with each other. This paper analyzes a randomized intervention that addresses both: distribution of solar lights to replace kerosene lamps. The solar lights strongly reduce carbon emissions from kerosene by half, while at the same time lowering household expenditures and improving health and subjective wellbeing. Providing lights for free, rather than charging a co-pay, boosts take-up without lowering usage. Access to solar lights can therefore be a highly cost-effective climate intervention, which at the same time increases the welfare of the poor.