Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Systematic CGE model cross-comparisons suggest central estimates of leakage rates for industrialized countries that range from 5% to 30%, which reflects different assumptions on the stringency of carbon pricing, the size of the abatement coalition and the magnitude of trade and fossil fuel supply elasticities.
“Systematic CGE model cross-comparisonssuch as the 29th study by the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) 43 and subsequent meta-analyses of simulation studies [44][45][46] -suggest central estimates of leakage rates for industrialized countries that range from 5% to 30%, which reflects different assumptions on the stringency of carbon pricing, the size of the abatement coalition and the magnitude of trade”
From Potential impacts and challenges of border carbon adjustments (2022) · cites this paper as [46]
A meta-analysis finds that without export rebates, even at a carbon price of €30/t, approximately 10% of EU exports would face significant cost increases and leakage risk.
“A meta-analysis (101) finds that without such export rebates, even at a carbon price of € 30/t, approximately 10% of EU exports would face significant cost increases and leakage risk (80, 91).”
From Carbon Leakage, Consumption, and Trade (2022) · cites this paper as [101]
Cites
Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis
Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005) · Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis · doi:10.1002/0470870168.ch1 · Cited by 603 · see citing works
Border tax adjustment: a feasible way to support stringent emission trading
Ismer, R., & Neuhoff, K. (2007) · European Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1007/s10657-007-9032-8 · Cited by 244 · see citing works
Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: Border adjustment or output-based allocation?
Monjon, S., & Quirion, P. (2011) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.04.020 · Cited by 145 · cited 6× · see citing works
“Armington elasticities, which are used to model international trade, are considered as a crucial parameter in leakage ratio estimates (Monjon and Quirion, 2011a; Alexeeva-Talebi et al., 2012a; Balistreri and Rutherford, 2012).”
InfluentialSelf-citationA border adjustment for the EU ETS: reconciling WTO rules and capacity to tackle carbon leakage
Monjon, S., & Quirion, P. (2011) · Climate Policy · doi:10.1080/14693062.2011.601907 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Self-citationCarbon Leakage in the Primary Aluminium Sector: What Evidence after 6.5 Years of the EU ETS?
Sartor, O. (2013) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2205516 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Potential impacts and challenges of border carbon adjustments
Böhringer, C., Fischer, C., Rosendahl, K. E., & Rutherford, T. F. (2022) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-021-01250-z · Cited by 292 · see citing works
Cosbey, A., Droege, S., Fischer, C., & Munnings, C. (2019) · Review of Environmental Economics and Policy · doi:10.1093/reep/rey020 · Cited by 217 · see citing works
Carbon Leakage, Consumption, and Trade
Grubb, M., Jordan, N. D., Hertwich, E., Neuhoff, K., Das, K., Bandyopadhyay, K. R., van Asselt, H., Sato, M., Wang, R., Pizer, W. A., et al. (2022) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-120820-053625 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
Branger, F., Quirion, P., & Chevallier, J. (2016) · The Energy Journal · doi:10.5547/01956574.37.3.fbra · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Self-citationDoes China's regional emission trading scheme lead to carbon leakage? Evidence from conglomerates
He, L.-Y., & Chen, K.-X. (2023) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113481 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Targeted carbon tariffs: Export response, leakage and welfare
Böhringer, C., Bye, B., Fæhn, T., & Rosendahl, K. E. (2017) · Resource and Energy Economics · doi:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2017.06.003 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
- Authors
- Branger, F., & Quirion, P.
- Affiliations
- AgroParisTech (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Branger, Frédéric
- ORCID
- Quirion, Philippe
- Venue
- Ecological Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 99
- Pages
- 29-39
- ISSN
- 0921-8009 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1546224588
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 36 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 3.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hal.science
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Ecological Economics (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Energy, Environment, Economic Growth
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
- Keywords
- border carbon adjustment, carbon leakage, competitiveness loss, heavy industry, unilateral climate policy, export rebates
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
