A CGE model of South Africa is used to find the potential for a double or triple dividend if the revenues raised from an energy-related environmental tax are recycled to households and industry through lowering existing taxes. Four environmental taxes and three revenue-recycling schemes are compared. The environmental taxes are (i) a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, (ii) a fuel tax, (iii) a tax on electricity use, and (iv) an energy tax. The four taxes are constructed such that they have a comparable effect on emissions. The revenue is recycled through either (i) a direct tax break on both labour and capital, (ii) an indirect tax break to all households, or (iii) a reduction in the price of food. A triple dividend is found - decreasing emissions, increasing GDP, and decreasing poverty - when any one of the environmental taxes is recycled through a reduction in food prices.
AbdiT.EdwardsL. (2002). “Trade, technology and wage inequality in South Africa.” University of Cape Town: DPRU working paper # 02/60.
2.
AdamsP. (2003). “Interpretations of Macroeconomic Results from a CGE Model such as GTAP.” Paper Delivered at the 6th Annual Conference on Global Trade and Policy Analysis, The Hague, Netherlands.
3.
AliberM.A. (2002). “Overview of the Incidence of Poverty in South Africa for the 10-year review.” Paper commissioned by the President’s office.
4.
BallardC.L.ShovenJ.B.WhalleyJ. (1985). “General equilibrium computations of the marginal welfare costs of taxes in the United States.” The American Economic Review75 (1):128-138.
5.
BlackP.RankinN. (1998). “On the Cost Increasing Effects of the new Labour Laws in South Africa.” The South African Journal of Economics. 66(4):452-463.
6.
BlackmanA. (1999). “The Economics of Technology Diffusion: Implications for Climate Change Policy in Developing Countries.” Resources for the Future: Working Paper: 99-142.
7.
BlignautJ.N.De WetT.J. (2001). “Some recommendations towards reducing electricity consumption in the South African manufacturing sector.” South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences4(2):359-379.
8.
BlignautJ.N.ZunckelM. (2004). “The cost of a decline in air quality.” In BlignautJ.N.De WitM.P., eds., Sustainable options. Cape Town: UCT press. 288-314.
9.
BlignautJ.N.MabuguR.Chitiga-MabuguM.R. (2005). “Calculating a greenhouse gas emissions database using energy balances: the case of South Africa 1998.” Journal of Energy in Southern Africa. 16(2):105-116.
10.
BoselloF.CarraroC.GaleottiM. (2001). “The double dividend issue: modelling strategies and empirical findings.” Environment and Development Economics6:9-45.
11.
BosquetB. (2000). “Environmental tax reform: does it work? A survey of the empirical evidence.” Ecological Economics34(1):19-32.
12.
BossierF.BrechetT. (1995). “A fiscal reform for increasing employment and mitigating CO2 emissions in Europe.” Energy Policy23(9):789-798.
13.
BovenbergA.L.De MooijR.A. (1994). “Environmental levies and distortionary taxation.” American Economic Review84(4):1085-1089.
14.
BovenbergA.L.VanF. der Ploeg (1996). “Optimal taxation, public goods and environmental policy with involuntary unemployment.” Journal of Public Economics62(1-2):59-83.
15.
BovenbergA.L.GoulderL.H. (1997). “Costs of environmentally motivated taxes in the presence of other taxes: General equilibrium analyses.” National Tax Journal50(1):59-87.
16.
BovenbergA.L.VanF. der Ploeg (1998). “Consequences of environmental tax reform for unemployment and welfare.” Environmental &Resource Economics12(2):137-150.
17.
BovenbergA.L. (1999). “Green tax reforms and the double dividend: an updated reader’s guide.” International Tax and Public Finance6:421-443.
18.
ByeB. (2000). “Environmental tax reform and producer foresight: an intertemporal computable general equilibrium analysis.” Journal of Policy Modeling22(6):719-752.
19.
CalitzE.SiebritsF. (1999). Economic Policy in South Africa. Pretoria: University of South Africa Press.
20.
De MooijR.A.BovenbergA.L. (1998). “Environmental taxes, international capital mobility and inefficient tax systems: Tax burden vs. tax shifting.” International Tax and Public Finance5: 7-39.
21.
De WetT.J. (2003). The effect of a tax on coal in South Africa: A CGE analysis, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pretoria, http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-06302004-143319.
22.
Department of Minerals and Energy (DME) (2000). Energy balance for South Africa: 1998. Pretoria: DME.
23.
DiasR. (2002). “Exploring the Nature of Unemployment in South Africa: Insights from the Labour Force Survey 2000.” Unpublished Paper Presented at the Development Policy Research Unit’s 2nd Annual Conference on Labour Markets and Poverty in South Africa.
24.
DixonP.B.ParmeterB.R.SuttonJ.VincentD.P. (1982). ORANI: A Multisectoral Model of the Australian Economy. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
25.
Du ToitC.KoekemoerR. (2003). “A labour model for South Africa.” South African Journal of Economics71(1):49-76.
26.
EdwardsL. (2001). “Globalisation and the skill bias of occupational employment in South Africa.” South African Journal of Economics69(1):40-71.
27.
EkinsP.BarkerT. (2001). “Carbon taxes and carbon emissions trading.” Journal of Economic Surveys15(3):325-376.
28.
Eskom (2001). “Environmental report 2000.” Accessed at http://www.eskom.co.za/enviroreport01/air.htm.
29.
FourieF.C.OwenA. (1993). “Value-added tax and regressivity in South Africa.” South African Journal of Economics61(4):281-300.
30.
FullertonD.MetcalfG.E. (1997). “Environmental Taxes and the Double Dividend Hypothesis: Did you Really Expect Something for Nothing?” NBER working paper # w6199.
31.
FullertonD.HendersonY.K. (1989). “The marginal excess burden of different capital tax instruments.” The Review of Economics and Statistics. 71(3):435-442.
32.
GoulderL.H. (1994). “Environmental taxation and the “double dividend”: A reader’s guide.” NBER working paper # w4896.
33.
GoulderL.H. (1995). “Effects of carbon taxes in an economy with prior tax distortions: an intertemporal general equilibrium analysis.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management29:271-297.
34.
GoulderL.H.ParryI.W.H.BurtrawD. (1997). “Revenue-raising versus other approaches to environmental protection: the critical significance of pre-existing tax distortions.” The RAND Journal of Economics28(4):708-731.
35.
GoulderL.H.ParryI.W.H.WilliamsR.C.BurtrawD. (1999). “The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting.” Journal of Public Economics72(3):329-360.
36.
HarrisonW.J.PearsonK.R. (1996). “Computing solutions for large general equilibrium models using Gempack.” Computational Economics9:83-127.
37.
HorridgeM. (2002). “ORANI-G: A Generic Single-Country Computable General Equilibrium Model.” Lecture notes for the Practical GE Modeling Course, June 17 - 21, 2002 at Monash University in Melbourne.
38.
International Energy Agency (2001). Key World Energy Statistics.
39.
JaffeA.PalmerK. (1997). “Environmental Regulation and Innovation: A Panel Data Study.” Review of Economics and Statistics79(4): 610-619.
40.
JaffeA.NewellR.StavinsR. (2000). “Technological Change and the Environment.” NBER working paper # 7970.
41.
JorgensonD.W.WilcoxenPJ. (1993). “Reducing US carbon emissions: An econometric general equilibrium assessment.” Resource and Energy Economics15:7-25.
42.
KingdonG.KnightJ. (2001). “Race and Incidence of Unemployment in South Africa”. Centre for the Study of African Economies, Department of Economics, Oxford.
43.
KingdonG.KnightJ. (2001). “Unemployment and wages in South Africa: A spatial approach”. Centre for the Study of African Economies, Department of Economics, Oxford.
44.
KingdonG.KnightJ. (2001). “Unemployment in South Africa: the nature of the beast”. Centre for the Study of African Economies, Department of Economics, Oxford.
45.
KlasenJ. (2000). “Measuring Poverty and Deprivation in South Africa.” Review of Income and Wealth46(1):33-58.
46.
LeibbrandtM.PoswellL.NaidooP.WelchM.WoolardI.. (2005). “Measuring recent changes in South African inequality and poverty using 1996 and 2001 census data.” Centre for Social Science Research(CSSR)Working paper No 84.
47.
MayJ. ed. (2000). Poverty and Inequality in South Africa, meeting the challenge. Cape Town and London: David Phillip and Zeb Press.
48.
National state of the Environment Report - South Africa (2003). “Climatic and Atmospheric Change”.
49.
OpschoorH. (2001). “Economic Growth, the Environment and Welfare: Are They Compatible?” In MottaRenaldo Seroa da, ed., Environmental Economics in Developing Countries. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
50.
ParryI.W.H. (1997). “Environmental taxes and quotas in the presence of distorting taxes in factor markets.” Resource and Energy Economics19(3):203-220.
51.
ParryI.W.HWilliamsR.C.GoulderL.H. (1999). “When Can Carbon Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management37:52-84.
52.
SandorR. (2001). “How I see it: The Case for Coal.” Environmental Finance. March12.
53.
Sasol (2001). Environmental report 2000. Johannesburg. Accessed at http://www.sasol.com/down-loads/pdf/environment/envan2001sec.pdf.
54.
South African Reserve Bank. Quarterly Bulletin. Pretoria: South African Reserve Bank (various issues).
55.
SparksA. (2003). Beyond the Miracle. Inside the New South Africa. Cape Town: Jonathan Ball.
56.
SSA (Statistics South Africa) (2001). Social Accounting Matrix 1998. Pretoria.
57.
TolR.S.J. (2005). “The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties.” Energy policy33: 2064-2074.
58.
UNDP (2003). South Africa Human Development Report 2003. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
59.
WoolardI. (2002). “An overview of Poverty and inequality in South Africa.” Working paper prepared for Department for International Development (DFID) (SA).
60.
World Bank (2003). The little green data book. World Bank: Washington DC.
