Do economists all favour a carbon tax?
Most do, with good reason
By R.A. | WASHINGTON
LAST week, a Twitter conversation broke out among a few economists concerning whether any serious economists opposed a carbon tax. No, concluded the tweeters, but Tyler Cowen begged to differ. Mr Cowen writes that he personally favours a carbon tax but can imagine a number of principled reasons other economists might not.
Why would we expect economists to support a carbon tax? It's very close to the economic ideal. Global warming is a phenomenon associated with emissions of greenhouse gases over and above natural cycles—largely those resulting from the burning of carbon fuels humans have dug up out of the ground. We expect normal economic activity to maximise social good because each individual balances costs and benefits when making economic decisions. Carbon emissions represent a negative externality. When an individual takes an economic action with some fossil-fuel energy content—whether running a petrol-powered lawnmower, turning on a light, or buying bunch of grapes—that person balances their personal benefits against the costs of the action. The cost to them of the climate change resulting from the carbon content of that decisions, however, is effectively zero and is rationally ignored. The decision to ignore carbon content, when aggregated over the whole of humanity, generates huge carbon dioxide emissions and rising global temperatures.
More from Free exchange
Religious competition was to blame for Europe’s witch hunts
Many children are still persecuted as alleged witches in Africa for similar reasons
Has BRICS lived up to expectations?
The bloc of big emerging economies is surprisingly good at keeping its promises
How to interpret a market plunge
Whether a sudden sharp decline in asset prices amounts to a meaningless blip or something more depends on mass psychology