近幾年極端天氣與生物多樣性等的變化都在警示我們氣候變遷已轉化為氣候危機。增長的人為溫室氣體排放對於全球暖化的影響最大，特別是化石燃料燃燒與工業導致的二氧化碳排放。歐盟為應對氣候變遷作出積極的努力，除排放交易體系外，還將於2027年全面施行碳邊境調整機制，對各國產業可能產生一定衝擊，特別是東亞地區的韓國、日本、中國大陸、台灣，皆在2021年度歐盟前二十大貿易夥伴之列。因此本研究以此為背景，希望運用E3ME模型模擬東亞氣候俱樂部對於中國大陸、台灣、日本、韓國深度減碳的作用，同時考慮對總體經濟、產業的影響。
若想達到巴黎協定使全球平均氣溫升幅控制在工業化前水準1.5℃和2℃內的目標，不得不面對經濟成長與碳排脫鉤的問題，兩者又與能源發電技術密切相關，故在東亞氣候俱樂部的減碳政策上本研究設計了碳稅和化石燃料裝置容量限制。並在稅收中立原則之下，考慮五種稅收的運用方式。為吸引發展中國家加入大幅減碳行列，還加入資金的國際移轉。
借由情境的設計與對比，本研究發現氣候俱樂部單獨施加碳稅效果相對有限，而在此基礎上加入燃油、燃煤、燃氣裝置容量限制，成員國則可減排約一半，且都對GDP有正向影響，稅收循環加強了這種正向影響。成員國大部分的碳邊境調整的相關產業產值都有所增加，其中機械設備的產值增幅最明顯。國際移轉使中國更有誘因加入氣候俱樂部，中國2050年的二氧化碳排放量較不加入氣候俱樂部時大幅降低。故在兩種減碳政策、稅收循環與國際移轉之下的氣候俱樂部是有明顯減碳效果的。

Extreme weather and loss of biodiversity in recent years are warning us that climate change is turning into a climate crisis. Increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel and industry, have the greatest impact on global warming. The EU has made positive efforts to deal with climate change. In addition to the emission trading system, the EU will also implement the carbon border adjustment mechanism in 2027, which may have a huge impact on the industries of East Asia countries. Therefore, based on the CBAM, this study hopes to use the E3ME model to simulate the effect of the East Asia Climate Club on deep abatement in China, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, and consider the impact on the economy and industry.
Decoupling of economic growth and carbon emissions needs carbon pricing. Moreover, these two are closely related to the energy power generation technology. Thus, the climate club abatement policy in East Asia is to design a carbon tax and fossil fuels installed capacity limits. Under the principle of tax revenue neutrality, the study considers using tax revenue in five ways. Furthermore, international transfers are also needed to induce developing countries to join the climate club.
Through the design and comparison of scenarios, the study finds that the effect of carbon tax imposed by climate club alone is relatively limited, while adding capacity limits of oil, coal and gas installations on this basis, the member countries can reduce emissions by about half. All of them have a positive impact on GDP, and the tax revenue recycling strengthens this positive impact. Most of the carbon border adjustment-related industries in member countries have increased their output, with the most significant increase in mechanical engineering. As an inducement for China to join the climate club, international transfers resulted in a significant reduction in China's carbon dioxide emissions in 2050. Therefore, the East Asia climate club has obvious abatement effect under two kinds of abatement policies, tax revenue recycling and international transfers.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究對象、方法與範圍 4
第三節 研究流程 6
第二章 文獻回顧 7
第一節 全球暖化外部性與氣候俱樂部 8
第二節 碳定價 10
第三節 環境稅制改革 11
第四節 E3ME模型之應用 13
第三章 政策背景 15
第一節 歐盟ETS和CBAM 16
第二節 中日韓台碳定價 19
第四章 理論架構 22
第一節 E3交互作用 22
第二節 FTT: Power 24
第三節 碳邊境稅之計算 25
第五章 實證模型分析 27
第一節 政策設計 27
第二節 情境設定 34
第三節 實證結果 37
第六章 結論與建議 49
參考文獻 52
中文參考文獻 52
英文參考文獻 52

中文參考文獻
陳宛君，陳奕均，森晶寿 (2022)。碳定價政策、日本全球暖化對策稅與台灣能源稅制。台灣銀行季刊，73(1):1-23。
孫志禹，胡連興 (2018)。中國水電的發展展望。國際清潔能源產業發展報告 (2018)。
汪燦 (2022)。碳中和目標下核電發展初步研究。民111年7月12日，取自：https://www.china5e.com/news/news-1131702-1.html
蕭代基等 (2020)。減碳政策在台灣：補貼或課稅？綠色經濟期刊，2020 (6)，1-23。
蕭代基等 (2022)。國際碳邊境調整機制對臺灣減碳與經濟的影響。臺灣能源期刊，9(1):1-24。
英文參考文獻
Barker, T., Junankar, S., Pollitt, H., & Summerton, P. (2009). The effects of environmental tax reform on international competitiveness in the European Union: Modelling with E3ME. In M. S. Andersen & P. Ekins (Eds.), Carbon-energy taxation: Lessons from Europe (pp. 147-214). Oxford University Press.
Barker, T., Anger, A., Chewpreecha, U., & Pollitt, H. (2012). A new economics approach to modelling policies to achieve global 2020 targets for climate stabilisation. International Review of Applied Economics, 26(2), 205-221.
Barrett, S. (2003). Environment and statecraft: The strategy of environmental treaty-making. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199286094.001.0001
Bierbrauer, F., Felbermayr, G., Ockenfels, A., Schmidt, K. M., & Südekum, J. (2021). A CO2-border adjustment mechanism as a building block of a climate club. Kiel Policy Brief, 151.
Buchanan, J. M. (1965). An economic theory of clubs. Economia , 32(125), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2552442
Cambridge Econometrics. (2019). E3ME technical manual v6.1. Retrieved July 29, 2022, from https://www.e3me.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/E3ME-Technical-Manual-v6.1-onlineSML.pdf
Delgado, F. J., Freire-González, J., & Presno, M. J. (2022). Environmental taxation in the European Union: Are there common trends? Economic Analysis and Policy, 73, 670-682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2021.12.019
European Commission. (2016). EU reference scenario 2016. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/20160713%20draft_publication_REF2016_v13.pdf
European Commission. (2021). Carbon market report. Retrieved May 31, 2022, from https://ec.europa.eu/clima/system/files/2021-10/com_2021_962_en.pdf
Freire-González, J. (2018). Environmental taxation and the double dividend hypothesis in CGE modelling literature: A critical review. Journal of Policy Modeling, 40(1), 194-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.11.002
Gokhale, H. (2021). Japan's carbon tax policy: Limitations and policy suggestions. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 3, 100082.
Goulder, L. H. (1995). Environmental taxation and the double dividend: A reader's guide. International Tax and Public Finance, 2(2), 157-183.
Goulder, L. H., & Schein, A. R. (2013). Carbon taxes versus cap and trade: A critical review. Climate Change Economics, 4(03), 1350010.
Hepburn, C. (2006). Regulation by prices, quantities, or both: A review of instrument choice. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(2), 226-247.
Hovi, J., Sprinz, D. F., Sælen, H., & Underdal, A. (2016). Climate change mitigation: A role for climate clubs? Palgrave Communications, 2(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.20
IPCC. (2018). Global warming of 1.5℃. Retrieved May 31, 2022, from https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/
IPCC. (2022). Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change. Retrieved May 31, 2022, from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/
Knobloch, F., Pollitt, H., Chewpreecha, U., Daioglou, V., & Mercure, J. F. (2019). Simulating the deep decarbonisation of residential heating for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C. Energy Efficiency, 12(2), 521-550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9710-0
Knobloch, F., Pollitt, H., Chewpreecha, U., Lewney, R., Huijbregts, M. A. J., & Mercure, J. F. (2021). FTT: Heat—A simulation model for technological change in the European residential heating sector. Energy Policy, 153, 112249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112249
Kwon, P. et al. (2022). 2050 climate neutrality roadmap for Korea ‒ K-Map Scenario: Implementing an ambitious decarbonization pathway for the benefit of future generations and the Korean economy. Retrieved July 12, 2022, from https://static.agora-energiewende.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2021/2021_04_INT_Korea_Map/K-Map_EN_final.pdf
Lee, K. C., & Shields, K. K. (1997). Modelling sectoral output growth in the EU economies. Research Report for EU Project on Expectations formation, business confidence and output fluctuations in the EU economies, December.
Lee, S. C., Pollitt, H., & Fujikawa, K. (2019). Energy, environmental and economic sustainability in East Asia: Policies and institutional reforms. Routledge.
Lee, S. C., Pollitt, H., & Park, S. J. (2015). Low-carbon, sustainable future in East Asia: Improving energy systems, taxation and policy cooperation. Routledge.
Lefèvre, J., Le Gallic, T., Fragkos, P., Mercure, J. F., Simsek, Y., & Paroussos, L. (2022). Global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios through the lens of structural change. Global Environmental Change, 74, 102510.
Mercure, J. F. (2012). FTT: Power: A global model of the power sector with induced technological change and natural resource depletion. Energy Policy, 48, 799-811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.025
Mercure, J. F. et al. (2018). Environmental impact assessment for climate change policy with the simulation-based integrated assessment model E3ME-FTT-GENIE. Energy Strategy Reviews, 20, 195-208
Mercure, J. F. et al. (2021). Reframing incentives for climate policy action. Nature Energy, 6(12), 1133-1143.
Mercure, J. F., Lam, A., Billington, S., & Pollitt, H. (2018). Integrated assessment modelling as a positive science: Private passenger road transport policies to meet a climate target well below 2℃. Climatic Change, 151(2), 109-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2262-7
Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input-output analysis: foundations and extensions. Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. (2008). Korea energy master plan.
Nordhaus, W. (2015). Climate clubs: Overcoming free-riding in international climate policy. American Economic Review, 105(4), 1339-1370. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.15000001
Park, N. B., Yun, S. J., & Jeon, E. C. (2013). An analysis of long-term scenarios for the transition to renewable energy in the Korean electricity sector. Energy Policy, 52, 288-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.09.021
Pearce, D. (1991). The role of carbon taxes in adjusting to global warming. The Economic Journal, 101(407), 938-948. https://doi.org/10.2307/2233865
Pigou, A. C. (1920). The economics of welfare. Macmillan, London.
Pollitt, H., Alexandri, E., Chewpreecha, U., & Klaassen, G. (2015). Macroeconomic analysis of the employment impacts of future EU climate policies. Climate Policy, 15(5), 604-625.
Pollitt, H., & Thoung, C. (2009). Modelling a UK 80% greenhouse gas emissions reduction by 2050. New Scientist, 3.
Prakash, A., & Potoski, M. (2007). Collective action through voluntary environmental programs: A club theory perspective. Policy Studies Journal, 35(4), 773-792.
Shaw, D., & Fu, Y. H. (2020). Climate clubs with tax revenue recycling, tariffs, and transfers. Climate Change Economics, 11(04), 1-14.
Stua, M., Nolden, C., & Coulon, M. (2022). Climate clubs embedded in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 180, 106178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106178
Tullock, G. (1967). Excess benefit. Water Resources Research, 3(2), 643-644.
UNFCCC. (1997). The Kyoto protocol. Bonn: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
UNFCCC. (2015). The Paris agreement. Bonn: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Unger, C., Mar, K. A., & Gürtler, K. (2020). A club’s contribution to global climate governance: The case of the Climate and Clean Air Coalition. Palgrave Communications, 6(1), 1-10.
Victor, D. G. (2006). Toward effective international cooperation on climate change: Numbers, interests and institutions. Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 90-103.
Victor, D. G. (2011). Global warming gridlock: Creating more effective strategies for protecting the planet. Cambridge University Press.
Weitzman, M. L. (1974). Prices vs. quantities. The Review of Economic Studies, 41(4), 477-491.
Weitzman, M. L. (2015). Internalizing the climate externality: Can a uniform price commitment help? Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, 4(2), 37-50.
Withana, S., ten Brink, P., Illes, A., Nanni, S., Watkins, E. (2014). Environmental tax reform in Europe: Opportunities for the future, A report by the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) for the Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. Final Report. Brussels.
World Bank. (2022). State and trends of carbon pricing 2022. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Yamazaki, A. (2017). Jobs and climate policy: Evidence from British Columbia's revenue-neutral carbon tax. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 83, 197-216.
Zhou, X., Ashina, S., Kuramochi, T., Moinuddin, M., Wakiyama, T., & Kuriyama, A. (2014). Japan 2050 low carbon navigator. IGES/NIES.