低碳经济文献综述
低碳旅游文献综述
［8］ 魏小安. 低碳经济与低碳旅游［N］ . 中国旅游报，2009 － 11 － 30 ( 002) .
［9］ 蔡萌，汪宇明. 低碳旅游: 一种新的旅游发展方式［J］ . 旅游学刊，2010，25 ( 1) : 13 － 17. ［10］ 侯文亮，梁留科，司冬歌. 低碳旅游基本概念体系研究［J］ . 安阳师范学院学报，2010，( 2) : 86 －89.
二 国内低碳旅游研究进展
在全球大力发展低碳经济的背景下，魏小安指出低碳旅游是 旅游的未来，旅游业虽为“绿色产业”，但仍存在较大的碳 减排空间［8］。蔡萌、汪宇明也认为低碳旅游是旅游业实现 可持续发展的一种新方式［9］。因而国内学者就低碳旅游展 开了大量的研究探讨，其研究视角主要包括: 低碳旅游基本概 念、低碳旅游发展思路、低碳旅游评价体系及低碳旅游应用 研究。
研究内容有限，但实用性 强 宏观研究为主，重理论研究，实践性 不足
国内外低碳旅游研究比较
综上所述，国内外学者对于近年来关起的低碳旅游都给予 了较多的兲注，但国内外研究领域却各有侧重，研究方法也 有所不同 。总体来说，国内研究相对比较系统，目前已基本 构建了低碳旅游的基础理论体系，幵开始转向低碳旅游评价 体系和具体应用研究; 而国外研究重点则集中于旅游交通的碳 排放测定，幵在测定基础上提出相应减碳措施，较少兲注低 碳旅游基础理论，研究方法以定量研究为主。
（二） 低碳旅游发展思路研究
• 郑琳琳、林喜庆提出，要发展低碳旅游，必须由旅游者、旅游目
的地、旅游企业、旅游管理部门共同参与，形成合力，建立低碳 旅游“四轮驱动”模型［11］。石培华、吴普认为，发展低碳旅 游的基本思路是狠抓重点环节、规划先行、科学开发利用气候资 源及加大宣传力度，推行低碳旅游时必须狠抓“六个一”工程 ［12，13］。雷琼分析了低碳旅游景区创建的意义及面临的困境， 认为创建低碳旅游景区需要政策支持、建立景区联盟和构建以生 态GDP 至上的景区评价理念［14］。作为一种全新的旅游方式和 消费载体，低碳旅游以其时尚性和高度兲注性，在微观层面带动 游客和企业树立低碳理念，促进低碳旅游市场的培育［15］
低碳经济发展模式文献综述及外文文献资料
本份文档包含：关于该选题的外文文献、文献综述一、外文文献标题: A practitioner's guide to a low-carbon economy: lessons from the UK作者: Fankhauser, Samuel.期刊: Climate Policy卷: 13；期: 3；页: 345-362；年份: 2013A practitioner's guide to a low-carbon economy: lessons from the UK AbstractPractically all major GHG emitters now have climate change legislation on their statute books. Given what is at stake, and the complexity of the task at hand, it is important that policy makers learn from each other and establish a code of good low-carbon practice. The main lessons from the UK are distilled and presented. Carbon policy is considered for key sectors, such as electricity, buildings, and transport, and possible decarburization paths are also outlined. It is shown that the transition to a low-carbon economy is economically and technologically feasible. Achieving it is primarily a question of policy competence and political will. This in turn means that climate change action needs a strong legislative basis to give the reforms statutory legitimacy. Low-carbon policies will have to address a wide range of market, investment and behavioral failures. Putting a price on carbon is an essential starting point, but only one of many policy reforms.Keywords: climate change policy; decarburization; green growth; low-carbon transition;1. IntroductionMore and more countries are taking action against climate change. Nearly all major GHG emitters, including many emerging markets, now have climate change legislation on their statute books (Town- shend et ak, 2011). It is debatable whether these efforts - and any international agreement that might reinforce them - will be sufficient to limit climate change to an acceptable level. However, given what is at stake, and the complexity of the task at hand, it is important that policy makers learn from one another and establish a code of good low-carbon practice. This article attempts to distil the main lessons from the UK.The climate change debate in the UK is fairly advanced, with a strong legal basis for climate action, ambitious targets, and sophisticated institutional arrangements (Fankhauser, Kennedy, & Skea, 2009). The UK also has a constantly evolving regulatory landscape, with occasional policy failures and U- turns, while a waning commitment among politicians and latent climate scepticism in parts of the press are putting the institutional framework increasingly to the test. As such, the UK is a good case from which to learn lessons.1There is a rich analytical literature on many aspects of climate change policy. For example, much has been written about the relative merit of different policy options (Hepburn, 2006; Pizer, 2002), the design of emissions trading schemes (Fankhauser & Hepburn, 2010a, 2010b; Grüll & Taschini, 2011; Murray, Newell, & Pizer, 2009),policy performance (Ellerman & Buchner, 2008; Ellerman, Convery, de Perthuis, & Alberola, 2010; Martin, Preux, & Wagner, 2009), and low-carbon innovation (Acemoglu, Aghion, Bursztyn, & Heinous, 2009; Aghion, Boulanger, & Cohen, 2011; Aghion, Dechezleprêtre, Heinous, Martin, & van Reenen, 2011; Dechezleprêtre, Glachant, Hascic, Johnstone, & Ménière, 2011; Popp, 2002).This article differs from the existing literature in that it takes an explicitly practical approach. While drawing on the analytical literature, it looks at the specific case of a country that wants to reduce its GHG emissions, in this case the UK. The policy ambition is much deeper than a marginal change in emissions, which is the concern of much of the literature. It is a comprehensive redesign of the modern economy. At the same time, the scope is narrower than that of the green growth literature, which includes wider notions of sustainable development besides low-carbon growth (Bowen & Fan- khauser, 2011). All decarburization efforts will face at least four challenges. First, a strong legal and institutional basis for low-carbon policy must be put in place (Section 2). Second, low-carbon objectives must be translated into a credible roadmap of sector, technology, and reform targets that can guide policy and determine whether the objectives are achievable (Section 3). Third, the necessary policies to implement the roadmap must be put in place (Section 4). Fourth, the wider socio-economic conse- quences of decarburization must be managed (Section 5). It is concluded in Section 6 that the low- carbon transition is achievable if these challenges are met and there is sufficient policy competence and political will.2. Providing the legal and institutional basisThe starting point for economy-wide decarburization is a strong legislative basis. The fundamental reforms to energy, transport, industrial, agricultural, and fiscal policy that will follow will need statu- tory legitimacy. The adoption of a climate change law is also a way of forging the broad political con- sensus needed during implementation. It is striking how many of the climate change laws in major economies have been bipartisan efforts (Townshend et ak, 2011). The UK Climate Change Act of 2008, for example, was passed near-unanimously.Most climate change laws are unifying laws that bring together existing strands of regulation (e.g. on energy efficiency), express a long-term objective, and create a platform for subsequent action. The UK Climate Change Act calls for a cut in GHG emissions of at least 80%, relative to 1990, by 2050. This is based on an ambition to limit median global warming to 2°C and keep the risk of extreme climate change (of say 4°C) to a minimum. The Act also defines the mechanism through which the long- term target is to be met: a series of statutory, 5-year carbon budgets that set a binding ceiling for GHG emissions over that period. The UK has been subject to this economy-wide carbon constraint since 2008.One of the key purposes of the legislation is to make a statement of intent that can subsequently guide policy delivery and reduce uncertainty for decision makers. Although action is required immedi- ately, building a low-carbon economy will take decades, a much longer term than policy makers can credibly commit. This creates problems for businesses, which will mistrust the long-term validity of the plan and hedge their behaviour. An important role of climate change legislation is to overcomesuch time inconsistency problems and instil long-term credibility into the policy effort.The issue is akin to the credibility of inflation targets (Kydland & Prescott, 1977; Barro & Gordon, 1983; Rogoff, 1985), and the institutional remedies that have been proposed for both problems bear some resemblance to one another. An independent institution, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), was created to recommend and monitor carbon budgets, in the belief that technocrats are more likely to take a long-term view than politicians. However, the carbon budgets are ultimately passed by Parlia- ment to give them statutory credibility. A judicial review is likely if the government systematically ignores the Committee's advice or if key policy decisions are inconsistent with carbon objectives.3. Defining a strategy for deliveryFor the high-level objectives of the climate law to be credible they need to be backed up by a sound implementation strategy. The UK, EU, and many other jurisdictions have developed concrete decarbo- nization roadmaps for this purpose (CCC, 2010; DECC, 2011; EC, 2011). These are not blueprints that need to be implemented to the letter. The markets and private initiative will determine most of the details. However, they represent important strategies that will detennine the speed and direction of travel.These roadmaps are underpinned by a fair amount of technical analysis, which ensures that the strat- egy is technologically and economically rational, as well as consistent with the ultimate emissions objective. Numerical simulation models are well suited to the calculation of the least-cost way of meeting a certain emissions target under given technology constraints. In the UK, both the CCC and the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) have used such models to inform their low-carbon roadmaps. The model evidence used by the CCC, in particular, is quite detailed. Even so, model results are heavily complemented and qualified by professional judgement.Least-cost optimization models (e.g. MARKAL) are used to determine the correct choice of technol- ogies as a function of their cost profiles (CCC, 2010), which are themselves derived from detailed engin- eering studies (e.g. Mott McDonald, 2011). Least-cost models also inform the allocation of scarce resources among competing uses; e.g. in determining whether the limited supply of sustainable biomass should be used for electricity generation, heating, or transport (CCC, 2011a). Detailed models of the electricity market can simulate how the power sector will cope with a rising share of inter- mittent renewables and inflexible nuclear capacity (Pöyry, 2011). Least-cost models provide estimates of the likely economic costs, although these bottom-up estimates should be complemented with general equilibrium or macro-econometric model mns (Barker et ak, 2007).A key question that the roadmap should answer is about the speed of decarbonization: 'What is the most economically rational rate of bringing emissions down?' The anticipated fall in the cost of low- carbon technologies and the effect of discounting suggests that a slow start will be followed by steep emissions reductions later.2 However, progress in reducing technology costs is a function of cumulativeinvestment, not just the passage of time. Postponing low-carbon investment may therefore delay the point at which these technologies become cost-effective. Scientists can also point to the climate benefits of acting early: future climate change is determined by the sum total of emissions over time, and not their level in an arbitrary future year (Meinshausen et ak, 2009), so each year of delay imposes a social and environmental climate cost.Moreover, there are limits to the speed at which emissions may be reduced cost-effectively later. As an illustration, if carbon-intensive capital has a lifetime of 25 years, the maximum annual emissions cut that can be achieved through the regular investment cycle is 4%. To achieve this, all new invest- ment (in both replacement and expansionary capital) would have to be carbon-free. Going beyond 4% would require the premature scrapping of existing capital. This is expensive unless productivity improvements (e.g. through energy efficiency) are so high that an overall reduction in the capital stock is warranted. It is argued below that this is not the case.The UK debate about the speed of reducing emissions has been heavily influenced by the particular time profile of investment needed in UK power sector. A large proportion of UK power plants are due for renewal in the 2020s. This creates both an opportunity and a need to decarbonize power generation early, as the investments made in the 2020s will determine electricity emissions for many decades to come. For these reasons, the CCC has recommended a swift pace of emission reductions in the power sector and an overall abatement path that is only slightly back-loaded (see Figure 1). This decarbonization path has profound implications not just for electricity generation, but for all emitting sectors.3.1. EnergyThe decarbonization of the electricity sector is at the core of the low-carbon transition in UK and all industrialized countries, for several reasons. First, power generation is a major source of GHG emissions (see Figure 1). Second, low-carbon power generation is well-understood and feasible. A number of low- carbon options are available, including renewable energy (wind, solar, biomass, hydro, and in time perhaps even marine), nuclear energy, and the as yet unproven carbon capture and storage (CCS). Although each of these options has its challenges - related to cost (off-shore wind, perhaps nuclear), public acceptability (nuclear, onshore wind), and/or commercial availability (CCS, marine) - they provide an adequate technological basis and choice in low-carbon power generation. Third, decarbo- nized electricity has an important role to play in reducing emissions in other sectors, chief among them transport (through battery electric vehicles), residential heating (through ground source and air source heat pumps), and perhaps some parts of industry.Any combination of renewables, nuclear, and CCS will succeed in bringing down the carbon inten- sity of power production. The choice is determined by cost, environmental considerations, and issues of system operation, and different countries make this choice differently. Germany, for example, has resisted nuclear energy, but invested heavily in solar energy. The UK has emphasized wind power over solar photovoltaics, and so far has accepted nuclear power. It is putting particular emphasis on off- shore wind, which is more expensive than onshore wind but raises fewer localenvironmental concerns (Bassi, Bowen, & Bankhäuser, 2012). The carbon intensity of electricity is required to fall by as much as 90% within 20 years, from over 500 gC02/kWh to 50 gC02/kWh, according to the timetable of the CCC (CCC, 2010). This tight target reduces the scope of intermediate technologies like gas, which might otherwise be attractive. Modern combined cycle gas turbines emit around 350 gC02/kWh, which is a considerable improvement on the current system average but too much in a truly low-carbon power sector. Unless fitted with CCS, future gas-fired power plants will therefore only be used spar- ingly, primarily as back-up capacity. This is a limited but important role. The combination of inter- mittent wind and baseload nuclear power creates challenges for load management, as neither is particularly flexible in responding to short-term fluctuations in demand. Gas can provide that flexibility and balance supply and demand. However, electricity market arrangements in the UK do not currently reward a mode of operation in which a plant is predominantly idle. This will have to change.Current electricity market arrangements create another obstacle to low-carbon investment. Power prices are presently determined competitively to reflect short-term operating costs. Low-carbon tech- nologies, such as nuclear and wind, typically have high capital costs and low operating costs. If they come to dominate the sector and set short-term marginal costs, market prices may fall to a level that is too low to recoup the upfront costs. In this case, further investment would stall.Reform of the electricity market has therefore become an essential prerequisite for decarbonization. After decades of liberalization, the reforms will bring about an increased role for the state. State inter- vention will be aimed, in particular, at rectifying three market failures that would otherwise prevent low-carbon investment. First, the state can put a price on carbon to internalize the climate change externality. Ideally, this would happen through a carbon tax or a stringent emissions trading scheme. The reality in the UK is somewhat more complicated. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) provides only a relatively weak price signal. The UK has thus legislated a unilateral carbon price floor to strengthen this signal. While this will motivate UK emitters to abate further, it will not reduce EU-wide emissions, which con- tinue to be set by the unchanged ETS cap (Fankhauser & Hepburn, 2010a, 2010b). The price instru- ments are complemented by a regulatory measure, an emissions performance standard set at (a high) 450 gC02/kWh.Second, the state can promote low-carbon (in particular renewable) energy and address market fail- ures related to technology development by using the classic instruments of either renewable energy obligations or feed-in tariffs (Section 4). The UK is moving from the former system to a variation of the latter, with the introduction of contracts for differences in low-carbon energy. Smaller-scale instal- lations benefit from a straight feed-in tariff. These demand-pull measures are complemented by a mod- erate supply-push from a new green investment bank, which will offer renewable energy investors improved access to finance. An investment subsidy is available for CCS pilots, although this process has been very slow.Third, the state can focus on the need to ensure investment into back-up capacity, as discussed above. In the UK, this will be achieved through the introduction of capacitypayments. The economic merit and practical challenges of this policy mix are further discussed in Section 4.3.2. TransportSurface transport is the second most important source of GHG emissions in the UK after electricity (see Figure 1). Cars dominate transport emissions, although emissions from lorries, vans, and buses are also substantial. Rail accounts for no more than 2% of the transport total.The strategy to reduce car emissions is two-pronged. In the short term, the emphasis is on reducing the carbon intensity of conventional cars through technological improvements and providing drivers with incentives to switch to more efficient cars. The UK has adopted an EU target to reduce the carbon intensity of new cars from current figure of around 145 g/km to 95 g/km in 2020. There is a similar target for vans.In the medium term, further efficiency improvements will have to come from new technologies (e.g. battery electric cars, plug-in electric vehicles, and perhaps fuel-cell-based vehicles). Biofuels will also play a role, with the limited amount of sustainable biofuel probably best targeted at heavy goods vehicles and aviation (where there are fewer alternatives). The CCC has calculated that 60% of new cars sold in 2030 will need to be electric (CCC, 2010), rising to 100% by 2035 for a fully electric car fleet in the late 2040s. These are very ambitious targets, which, if met, will have repercussions on elec- tricity demand and the country's refuelling infrastmcture.In comparison to technology, the role of demand-side measures will be relatively modest and insuf- ficient to reverse the growth in driving-kilometres, although it will nevertheless be important. Changes in travel behaviour, such as eco-driving, better journey planning, car sharing, and modal shift, can have a significant effect, but alterning entrenched behaviour patterns will require persistent effort (as suggested in a recent UK pilot study on 'smarter choices'; CCC, 2010).As in the power sector, a diverse set of policies are in place to encourage the transition. Arguably the most powerful - fuel duty - is primarily a fiscal measure; it accounts for almost 5% of total government income and is the most important source of indirect tax revenue after V AT (Adam & Browne, 2011). Fuel duty helps to correct a multitude of transport-related externalities. If the entire levy were treated as a carbon tax, the implicit tax rate would be over £200 per tC02 (Bowen & Rydge, 2011).In addition, other vehicle-related taxes, such as excise duty or company car tax, are differentiated by carbon efficiency. Electric cars are subsidized by up to £5000 per vehicle, while matched funding for recharging stations is provided under the Plug-In Places programme. These policies have been rela- tively effective. Since 2008, the carbon intensity of new cars in the UK has fallen by about 9%, although the uptake of electric cars is still very low.3.3. Residential buildings and industryThe buildings and industrial sectors, when combined, account for over two-thirds of UK GHG emis- sions. A large part of these are indirect emissions from electricity use, which are assigned to the power sector in carbon accounts. However, both direct and indirect emissions are important from a demand-management perspective.The initial focus for reducing residential and industry emissions is on energy efficiency. There is much debate about the potential of energy-efficiency measures that are available at low or zero econ- omic cost. In the UK, the CCC expects a 23% reduction in non-electric energy use in buildings and industry by 2020, relative to 2007, and a 13% reduction in electricity use (CCC, 2012).Over the medium term, the focus may shift from energy efficiency to renewable heat. The CCC expects the share of renewable heat to rise from the current 1% of heat demand to 12% in 2020, much of it back-loaded, as renewable heat is still relatively expensive. From the late 2020s onwards, further decarbonization will require currently expensive options such as solid wall insulation and heat pumps. Additional measures in industry are difficult and will require new emissions reduction techniques. Options include industrial CCS, process innovation, and product substitution, none of which is as yet proven.Energy-efficiency gains are notoriously elusive. There are a multitude of policy, market, and behav- ioural barriers, some of which are well understood, others less so. This is mirrored in the policy frame- work. No other aspect of UK low-carbon agenda has seen more policy experimentation, and nowhere else is the policy landscape more complex. Although regulatory measures dominate, there are price incentives in the form of a Climate Change Levy (a carbon-cum-energy tax) and the indirect effect of the EU ETS, the cost of both are passed through to end-users. Energy-intensive businesses can avoid the Climate Change Levy by entering into a voluntary Climate Change Agreement; around 50 sectors have already done so.Renewable heat is subsidized through a renewable heat incentive. The service sector has its own mechanism, the CRC Energy Efficiency scheme, which relies on a combination of reputation effects (through a performance league table) and price incentives (through a carbon tax, later to be converted into a trading scheme). Residential energy efficiency has been promoted primarily through a succes- sion of supplier obligations (which commit energy utilities to certain energy savings or carbon emis- sions targets in their client base) and the much-vaunted Green Deal, which promises easier access to energy-efficiency finance by tying loans to the energy meter rather than householders. Despite this flurry of activity, progress in increasing residential and industrial energy efficiency has been mixed (CCC, 2012).3.4. AgricultureAgriculture accounts for perhaps 10% of UK GHG emissions, most in the form of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N20) (CCC, 2012). There are accounting issues, however: agricultural and land-use emis- sions are known with much less certainty than energy-related emissions. Similarly, low-GHG options for agriculture are less well understood than decarbonization in other sectors.The available evidence suggests that there is scope to reduce emissions further, e.g. through increased feed efficiency and dietary changes in livestock, the deployment of anaerobic digestion systems, and better nutrient management for crops. However, beyond these low-cost measures, deep decarbonization maybe difficult. On the supply side, further action may engender ethical and environ- mental issues (e.g. related to animal welfare and the role of genetically modified food). On the demand side,behavioural change with respect to diets is likely to be controversial (although it would have sub- stantial health benefits; see Ganten, Haines, & Souhami, 2010). It is therefore likely that agricultural emissions (together with sectors such as aviation) will account for an increasing fraction of the increas- ingly tighter carbon budgets over the longer term.Although agriculture is one of the most highly regulated sectors in the UK economy, the policy approach to agricultural decarbonization has chiefly relied on voluntary action. Opportunities to reduce emissions through adjustments in existing policies, such as the EU Nitrates Directive or the Common Agricultural Policy, have not been taken up. Consequently, emissions have primarily been reduced as a result of unrelated policies and developments. Fertilizer-related emissions, for example, have fallen significantly as a consequence of higher prices and regulation. (A similar story holds for waste management, where methane emissions have fallen sharply as a by-product of an aggressive landfill tax.)4. Designing policiesAs discussed in the previous section, policy measures to create a low-carbon economy are needed on three fronts (Stern, 2006). First, a price should be put on carbon to internalize the climate change externality. Second, low-carbon technology should be promoted by addressing externalities and market failures related to innovation. Third, carbon-efficient behaviour and investment should be encouraged, in particular to unlock the existing energy-efficiency potential.Although the emphasis is often on the carbon price, all three sets of policies are equally important. As shown in the previous section (see also Bowen & Rydge, 2011), the UK has an elaborate low-carbon policy landscape. There are measures to put a price on carbon (e.g. the EU ETS, Climate Change Levy, carbon price support), to support new technologies (e.g. renewable energy obligations, renewable heat incentives, feed-in tariffs), to provide investor confidence (e.g. electricity market reforms), to change energy-efficiency behaviour (e.g. CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme, supplier obligations), and to facilitate access to finance (e.g. Green Deal, Green Investment Bank). Despite this complexity, which itself poses challenges, independent observers have expressed doubt that the UK policy environment is sufficient to meet the targets the country has set itself (CCC, 2010).4.1. Putting a price on carbonThere are two generic ways of putting a price on carbon: taxation or an emissions trading scheme.3 There is a large body of literature, going back to Weitzman (1974), on the relative merits of the two options (see Hoel & Karp, 2001; Newell & Pizer, 2003). Most economists probably favour a carbon tax, although where there are mandatory carbon constraints (as in the UK) the traditional Weitzman argu- ment would advocate quantity-based policies.4In practice, policy makers have been swayed less by theoretical niceties than by political realities, and in most cases an emissions trading scheme is easier to implement than a carbon tax: it creates a valuable asset - emissions permits - which can be used to pacify industry. In the case of the EU ETS, the stock of permits is worth around euro20 billion a year, and handing them out for free has indeed beensufficient to secure industry buy-in. However, there has also been a backlash against the windfall profits enjoyed by carbon 'fat cats' (Sandbag, 2011). Indeed, the European Commission has found it hard to reverse the practice of free allocation. This suggests that the use of free permits should be cur- tailed as much as possible from the outset, although some will be necessary to create consensus. The EU ETS has yielded a wealth of other practical lessons, including the need to manage price fluctuations (e.g. through an auction reserve price) and the importance of competent regulation (see Ellerman et ak, 2010; Fankhauser & Hepburn, 2010a, 2010b, for a review).Even in the presence of an emissions trading scheme, most countries have complementary taxes that cover emissions outside the scheme, strengthen the price signal within it, address other externalities, or simply raise revenue. Levying taxes on top of a trading scheme will have a detrimental effect on the carbon permit price and reduce the gains from trade (Fankhauser & Hepburn, 2010a, 2010b), but there is merit in using the two instruments in parallel in different parts of the economy.The most effective way of sending a carbon price signal through taxation is a pure carbon (or carbon- equivalent) tax, probably levied upstream as this would be administratively easier. In practice, policy makers often opt for a combination of carbon and energy taxes, hoping to meet different objectives with one instrument, or responding to industry pressure. The result can be widely different carbon prices across sectors and therefore a potentially inefficient allocation of the abatement burden. Accord- ing to Mirrlees et ak (2011), the implicit carbon tax on UK transport and energy emissions ranges from zero to almost £250 per tC02.5 The potential for green taxes and green tax reform is discussed by the Green Fiscal Commission (2009).4.2. Promoting low-carbon innovationThe central role of new technologies in decarbonization makes innovation policy a critical part of the low-carbon strategy. There are well-known externalities in research and innovation, most of them generic and not related to climate change. Countries have research and development (R&D) policies to address them, such as research grants, innovation prizes, patents, and tax credits, all of which are available to low-carbon innovators.The question then is whether there are additional market failures involved in low-carbon inno- vation that require further intervention, or whether the combination of a carbon price (to correct the climate externality) and R&D support (to address innovation externalities) would be sufficient. Aghion, Boulanger et ak (2011) have suggested there is a need for further intervention and has found evidence of path dependence - e.g. in the automotive industry (Aghion, Dechezleprêtre, et ak, 2011) - which makes traditional high-carbon research more likely than low-carbon innovation. High-tech firms may also find it harder to access finance because they create few tangible assets at the outset.There are a number of market or system failures that prevent new technologies from moving along the innovation chain towards successful commercialization (Foxon et ah, 2005), including a well- documented 'valley of death' between demonstration and pre-commercial deployment (Gmbh, 2004). Policy intervention is therefore required,。
低碳经济下构建我国低碳会计的思考文献综述
二、文献综述（包括摘要、关键词。含本选题国内外研究现状、研究主要成果、发展趋势、存在问题等内容，字数不少于2000字，力求内容切题，具有综合归纳性。）
文献综述
会计学
低碳经济下构建我国低碳会计的思考
一、查阅中外文献资料目录，所查阅的中外文献资料理工科专业至少10篇，文科类专业至少15篇，其中外文文献至少2篇（含作者、书名或论文题目、出版社或刊名、出版年月或期号及页码等，未经本人查阅的文献资料目录不得列上）
[1]孙兴华.关于在中国实行绿色会计的探讨[J].会计研究，2000.2
1997年证监会发布的《公开发行股票公司信息披露的内容与格式准则第一号<招股说明书的内容与格式>》中关于“发布招股说明书正文的风险因素与对策”中规定，要公布发行人所在行业的行业特点、发展趋势中可能存在的不利因素及行业竞争情况，包括环保因素的限制、严重依赖有限的自然资源等。1999年中国证监会发布的《公开发行股票公司信息披露的内容与格式准则第六号<法律意见书的内容与格式>(修订)》在“发行人的重大债权、债务关系”中规定，要说明发行人是否因环境保护、知识产权、产品质量、劳动安全、人身权等原因产生侵权之债；“发行人的环境保护和产品质量标准”规定，要说明发行人的生产经营活动是否符合有关环境保护的要求，近三年来是否因违反环境保护方面的法律、法规而被处罚。上述法规在披露公司环境信息和碳排放量方面发挥了一定的作用。然而，对于上市公司的年报却没有关于环境问题的具体披露要求，所以对公司日常经营过程中的环境信息无法予以及时披露。
低碳经济背景下房地产市场发展文献综述_1
低碳经济背景下房地产市场发展文献综述发布时间：2023-01-13T08:59:29.443Z 来源：《建筑实践》2022年第18期作者：李明蕊，任家强[导读] 低碳经济形势下房地产的经济研究是许多专家学者研究的主要内容李明蕊，任家强（沈阳建筑大学，辽宁沈阳110168）摘要：低碳经济形势下房地产的经济研究是许多专家学者研究的主要内容。
本文对低碳经济下房地产经济类相关文献行归纳梳理，然后从低碳经济的内涵、低碳经济对房地产的意义、发展的影响、目前存在的问题、房地产经济管理创新发展策略方面归纳专家学者的观点，最后做出简要评述。
关键词：低碳经济；房地产；文献综述随着经济的发展，全球环境恶化，二氧化碳排放量增多，各国开始走低碳可持续的路线。
在我国全面开启生态文明建设新征程中，低碳经济符合我国经济发展的要求，在这种追求减少高碳能源排放的经济发展模式下，房地产作为高耗能行业，其未来发展必须进行转型。
因此，未来房地产发展中，必须坚持低碳经济，全面开展绿色环保建设，促进绿色消费，使得房地产结构发生调整，从而促进房地产整体经济的良好发展。
现主要从低碳经济对房地产发展经济影响、现阶段我国房地产发展存在问题以及低碳模式下房地产经济管理创新方面做出了不同的阐述。
1.低碳经济的内涵对于低碳经济，臧艳艳（2022）认为其内涵主要是减少对煤炭、石油等能源的消耗以实现低碳环保的目标，而要实现这个目标，国家需要对技术、制度等方面进行不断创新，并且需要加快产业的升级转型，低碳经济下房地产模式所消耗的能源比以往的要少得多，符合我国可持续发展的路线，更能实现经济和环境的同步发展。
2.房地产行业引入低碳经济发展理念的重要意义房地产作为资源消耗量较大的产业之一，是低碳经济发展的重要方向。
房地产行业引入低碳经济的发展理念，可以有效的节约资源，更好的顺应时代发展潮流。
昌惠惠（2020）认为房地产引入低碳经济理念、建设绿色建筑以及从源头治理等措施都能降低污染程度，符合当前我国碳排放政策，满足了社会各界人士的环保理念，为我国2030年实现“碳达峰”，2060年实现“碳中和”的目标贡献行业力量。
低碳经济学综述
低碳经济学综述一、低碳经济理论基础（一）经济学理论根据GDP是上世纪最伟大的发现之一,为各国的经济发展提供了参考和比较依据,GDP作为经济学主要研究课题,也让许多人对经济学产生了误导,许多人认为,经济学就是一门研究如何将国家GDP上升的学科。
实际上,在经济学发展历程中,出现了许多不同的经济学模式,经济学不仅是对本国经济发展进行关注,也要对世界整体性的发展进行关注。
而其中,低碳经济所关注的并非本国情况,而是全球性减少二氧化碳排放的问题。
各国商人处于商业联邦状态下,而所谈的大多为世界经济发展,从事经济研究人员,就是要使全人类获得发展,与政治经济理论相悖。
政治经济,也是各国为改进自身的经济发展状况所需要遵循的国家发展政策,全世界商业自由的原则,是其责任所在,而经济学研究,应该立足于世界。
经济学研究是为国家一切利益,也是为全人类的共同利益。
财富为人类享受物质的象征,也是让人获得幸福感的重要手段。
然而,政治经济学只是为让少数人致富,学者提出,应该更多对社会大众的福利进行关注,应该将政治经济学作为人类增强幸福感的重要内容。
累积国家财富并非政府成立的首要目的,政府应该是让所有公民、大多数公民都可以享受财富,并感受财富所带来的乐趣。
这些经济理论,是低碳经济的发展源头。
(二)相关学科比较、继承生态学为经济系统、生态系统的研究复合体,对其功能、结构、发展规律做研究的学科。
根据自然系统的循环性,与能量流动模式,构建成有规律的经济系统,可以让经济系统和谐融入自然系统中,从而形成全新的经济模式,这种循环经济,本身也是一种生态经济模式,使用生态规律,指导人们做社会经济活动。
绿色经济概念是皮尔斯在《绿色经济蓝皮书》中首次提出,其主要在于对人类生存患者进行维持,对能源做合理保护,资源进行合理利用,利于人体健康的经济模式,可将其看做为平衡经济模式。
绿色经济、循环经济、低碳经济都是在资源高消耗、高投入、高排放、低效率的状态下,转向为资源低投入、低排放、低消耗、高效率状态。
关于低碳经济的论文
关于低碳经济的论⽂低碳经济是指在可持续发展理念指导下，通过技术创新、制度创新、产业转型、新能源开发等多种⼿段，尽可能地减少煤炭、⽯油等⾼碳能源消耗，减少温室⽓体排放，达到经济社会发展与⽣态环境保护双赢的⼀种经济发展形态。
当代，论⽂常⽤来指进⾏各个学术领域的研究和描述学术研究成果的⽂章，简称之为论⽂。
关于低碳经济的论⽂1 摘要： 针对建筑业低碳经济发展现状，做了简单的论述。
⽬前，各地区全⾯贯彻国家发展战略，制定节能减排新要求，规范建筑业低碳经济发展，促进建筑业低碳经济的发展。
节能减排新要求，对建筑建设提出了新的要求。
基于此，加强此课题的研究，提出践⾏建筑低碳经济的技术途径，有着必要性。
关键词： 建筑业；低碳经济；节能减排；绿⾊环保 现阶段，我国基础设施建设规模迅速扩⼤，资源和能源消耗量不断增加，带来了巨⼤的⽣态环境压⼒。
基于此，建筑业发展低碳经济，利⽤节能环保技术、材料等，来⽀撑低碳建筑和绿⾊建筑的实现，进⽽促进建筑业可持续化发展。
⼀、建筑业低碳经济的发展 （⼀）建筑业发展低碳经济的必要性 从必要性⾓度分析，建筑业发展低碳经济，有着以下⼏点原因：1）基础建设规模扩⼤。
随着城市化进程加速，使得基础设施建设规模达到空前状态。
在《核电中长期发展规划（20xx-2020年）》中提出，截⽌到20xx年，我国核电装机容量要达到4000万kW，⽔电装机规模要达到3亿kW以上。
除此之外，⾼速铁路、桥梁⼯程等的建设已经达到空前状态。
2）建筑材料需求不⾜。
基础设施建设，需要⼤量的建筑材料。
据相关数据显⽰，每⽣产1t⽔泥，则需要使⽤0.8t的⽯灰⽯，从我国矿采储量来说，可⽤于⽔泥⽣产⽯灰⽯矿约为250亿t，按照现在的消耗速度，还能维持不到40年。
3）环境压⼒增加。
建筑⾏业发展，需要消耗⼤量的建筑材料。
建筑材料⽣产配置时，会释放⼤量的污染物质，影响⽣态环境。
据相关数据显⽰，在20xx年我国CO2累计排放量已经超过美国，达到1464亿t。
关于我国发展低碳经济的文献综述
龙源期刊网 http://www.qikan.com.cn 关于我国发展低碳经济的文献综述 作者：梁蕊 来源：《时代金融》2013年第06期
【摘要】低碳经济，是指在可持续发展理念指导下，通过技术创新、制度创新、产业转型、新能源开发等多种手段，尽可能地减少煤炭石油等高碳能源消耗和温室气体的排放，达到经济社会发展与生态环境保护双赢的一种经济发展形态。发展低碳经济是一种经济发展模式的选择，它意味着能源结构的调整、产业结构的局部调整以及技术的革新，是中国走可持续发展道路的重要途径。低碳经济以其独特的优势和巨大的市场已经成为世界经济发展的热点。它不但是未来世界经济发展结构的大方向，也是我国占据世界经济竞争至高点的关键。本文通过对发展低碳经济的机遇和挑战的分析，得出了其发展前景及可行性。
【关键词】低碳经济 可持续发展 可行性 一、引言 （一）选题背景 2012年4月22日是第43个“地球日”，其主题是“珍惜地球资源，转变发展方式，倡导低碳生活”。地球日是呼唤人们尊重地球、保护地球的日子，更是我们探索如何更好地合理利用资源，使地球真正实现人与自然的和谐成长的日子。应通过低碳经济模式与低碳生活方式，实现社会可持续发展。
根据世界卫生组织报导：世界上20个污染最严重的城市，中国就占了16个，大陆有三分之二的城市深陷垃圾围城困局，导致每年35万人提前死亡，保守估计经济损失高达八千万人民币。
种种情况都表明能源污染问题已经变得尖锐，政府也应考虑新的经济发展方式来保护这个社会环境，如今在大城市中涌现出一批批“低碳一族”，他们正以自己生活细节的改变证明：气候变化已经不再只是环保主义者、政府官员和专家学者关心的问题，而是与我们每个人息息相关。在提倡健康生活已成潮流的今天，“低碳生活”不再只是一种理想，更是一种值得期待的新的生活方式。
（二）研究意义 1.对我国实行可持续发展的意义 龙源期刊网 http://www.qikan.com.cn 我国的工业化道路，必须走可持续发展的道路，建设资源节约型、环境友好型社会，坚定不移地推进节能减排低碳经济的发展，实现经济可持续发展，因而，在我国实行低碳经济显得极其重要。
国外低碳经济研究综述
国外低碳经济研究综述随着世界工业经济的发展、人口的剧增、人类欲望的无限上升和生产生活方式的无节制，世界气候面临着越来越严重的问题。
尤其是由化石燃料过度消耗所导致的全球变暖，引起了世界范围的广泛关注。
全球变暖严重危害了社会经济的发展，深刻触及到能源安全、生态安全、水资源安全和粮食安全，甚至威胁到人类的生存。
这一现象亦引发了国际社会对现有经济发展模式的反思，在此背景下，“低碳经济”(low-carbon economy)的概念应运而生，并越来越受到国际社会的重视。
“低碳经济”的概念最早由英国政府在2003年发表的《能源白皮书》中提出，题为“我们能源的未来：创建低碳经济”。
《能源白皮书》指出，“低碳经济是通过更少的自然资源消耗和更少的环境污染，获得更多的经济产出；低碳经济是创造更高的生活标准和更好的生活质量的途径和机会，也为发展、应用和输出先进技术创造了机会，同时也能创造新的商机和更多的就业机会。
”低碳经济发展模式提出后，各国纷纷相应。
学术界围绕低碳经济的研究也不断地发展和丰富。
国外学者对低碳经济的研究起步较早，研究成果也颇为丰富。
总结国外现有的研究成果，主要可以归纳为三个方面：一是低碳经济与经济增长，研究重点在碳排放的影响因素，碳排放与经济增长的关系及碳减排对行业发展的影响等；二是低碳经济实现的制度安排，研究主要集中对碳税(carbon tax)和碳交易(carbon trading)的讨论；三是不同国家发展低碳经济的进程。
1低碳经济与经济增长关注“低碳经济”的一个重要方面就是对碳排放量(carbon emission)的控制，碳排放量受到哪些因素的影响一直是学者们研究的一个热点。
通过对现有文献的分析发现，碳排放量的影响因素不仅包括Kaya公式所揭示的人口、GDP和能源消耗[1]，还包括国际贸易，两国的商品贸易为碳排放创造了一种转移机制。
人口规模、结构对碳排放量的影响不言而喻，人口越多，碳排放量就越多。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
北京地区经济增长与碳排放脱钩状态实证研究，吴振信，石佳（2013）。通过构建经济增长与碳排放脱钩状态的Tapio分析模型，研究了北京地区1999年-2008年经济增长与碳排放的脱钩关系，分析结果表明，北京地区2001年和2002年呈现经济增长和碳排放的强脱钩，2004年为扩张性耦合，其他各段时间都属于弱脱钩状态，呈现这种状态的主要原因是北京地区以第三产业为主的产业结构，以及较高的能源效率。 北京碳排放与经济增长间关系的实证研究——基于EKC和STIRPAT模型，张丽峰（2013）。利用1981-2010年北京经济增长和碳排放的数据，验证了两者间EKC的存在性。运用碳生率和脱钩指数分析了经济增长与碳排放的短期静态关系和长期动态关系，并利用STIRPAT模型分析了北京碳排放的影响因素。结果表明，北京经济增长与碳排放之间存在倒U型关系，拐点为人均GDP34423元。北京处于弱脱钩状态，脱钩指数与其经济发展阶段比较吻合，经济发展水平对北京碳排放的影响最显著，其次是能源效率，能源消费结构的影较小。 低碳经济的概念辨识及评价指标体系构建，付加锋、庄贵阳、高庆先。低碳经济是气候变化背景下人类的必然选择。研究探讨了低碳经济的概念和核心要素，指出低碳经济是一种经济形态，其发展过程具有阶段性特征，低碳经济应该包括四个核心要素，即发展阶段、资源禀赋、技术水平和消费模式。 低碳经济的内涵及理论基础浅析。低碳经济是在人类温室效应及由此产生的全球气候变暖问题日趋严重的背景下提出的。2003年英国政府发表《能源白皮书》，题为“我们未来的能源——创建低碳经济”，首次提出低碳经济概念。所谓低碳经济是指在可持续发展理念指导下通过技术创新、制度创新、产业转型、新能源开发等多种手段，尽可能地减少煤炭石油等高碳能源消耗，减少温室气体排放，达到经济社会发展与生态环境保护双赢的一种经济发展形态。低碳经济的实质在于提升能源的高效利用、推行区域的清洁发展、促进产品的低碳开发和维持全球的生态平衡。这是从高碳能源时代向低碳能源时代演化的一种经济发展模式。低碳经济是一种经济发展理念，更是一种经济发展模式，是一个经济、社会、环境系统交织在一起的综合性问题，具有三个方面的特征：一是低碳经济的经济性，低碳经济应按照市场经济的原则和机制来发展，其发展不应导致人们的生活条件和福利水平明显下降。二是低碳经济的技术性。通过技术进步，在提高能源效率的同时，也降低二氧化碳等温室气体的排放强度。前者要求在消耗同样能源的条件下，人们享受到的能源服务不降低；后者要求在排放同等温室气体情况下人们的生活条件和福利水平不降低；三是低碳经济的目标性。发展低碳经济的目标是将大气中温室气体的浓度保持在一个相对稳定的水平上，不至于带来全球气温上升影响人类的生存和发展，以实现人与自然的和谐发展。低碳经济的构成要素：第一，低碳经济发展的核心是低碳能源。低碳能源是指提高能效、低能耗、低污染、低碳排放的能源，改变现有的能源结构是发展低碳经济的关键。要使现有的高碳能源结构逐渐向低碳的能源结构转变。第二，低碳经济发展的动力是低碳技术。第三，低碳产业是低碳经济发展的载体。低碳经济发展的水平取决与低碳产业承载能力的大小。第四，低碳管理是低碳经济发展的保障。低碳经济的理论基础：可持续发展理论：1987年经济合作与发展组织在其发表的《我们共同的未来》报告中第一次把可持续发展明确定义为：“既满足当代人们需要又不对后代人满足其需要的能力构成危害的发展。”该理论的核心思想是经济发展应当建立在社会公正和环境可持续发展的前提下，而低碳经济的目标就是追求人、自然、经济和社会的协调与可持续发展，实质和核心都蕴含着深刻的可持续发展思想。环境库兹涅茨曲线（EKC）：环境库兹涅茨曲线是1995年由美国普林斯顿大学的经济学家格鲁格曼和克鲁格提出，它的含义是“沿着一个国家的发展轨迹尤其是在工业化的起飞阶段，不可避免的会出现一定程度的环境恶化，在人均收入达到一定水平后，经济发展会有利于环境质量的改善。”通过对人均收入与环境污染指标之间的演变拟合，说明经济发展对环境污染程度的影响。克鲁格曼和克鲁格认为经济发展对环境污染水平有着很强的影响，在经济发展过程中生态环境会随着经济的增长，、人均收入的增加而不可避免的持续恶化，只有人均GDP达到一定水平的时候，环境污染反而会随着人均GDP的进一步提高而下降。人均收入和环境保护的关系是一个倒U型曲线。我国正处于工业化、城镇化加快推进的关键阶段，经济快速增长和人口不断增加使资源不足的矛盾越来越突出，如果沿着现有的经济增长方式和消费模式发展，资源与环境约束将日趋紧张，而低碳经济模式可以改变消费结构和产业结构，最终促进可持续发展。 低碳经济理论研究的文献回顾与展望：低碳经济是应对全球气候变化的必然选择，它与实现人类经济、社会和环境发展相关。自提出以来，尤其是在全球化和国际金融危机的双重背景下，低碳经济更是受到各国的普遍高度重视。 中国碳排放强度及其影响因素间动态因果关系研究——以扩展型KAYA公式为视角，任晓松，赵涛（2014）：以扩展型KAYA公式为视角，采用多变量协整和误差修正模型测算了中国1980-2010年间碳排放强度及其影响因素之间的长期均衡和短期波动关系，在此基础上检验了其相互间格兰杰因果关系，实证结果表明：我国碳排放强度与能源消费结构、能源强度和产业结构之间存在协整关系；碳排放强度是能源消费结构、产业结构的格兰杰原因；能源强度和产业结构是能源消费结构的格兰杰原因。 中国工业碳排放与经济增长的关系研究——基于STIRPAT模型，吴英姿，都红雯，闻越春（2014）：文章基于改造的STIRPAT模型，以1995-2010年间按碳排放特征分组的中国工业面板数据为样本，实证研究了我国工业碳排放与经济增长关系及其主要影响因素。研究结果表明，中国碳排放与经济增长具有U型曲线特征，拐点处的经济产出高排放强度行业低于低排放强度行业。 中国碳减排政策的模拟分析——基于中国能源CGE模型的研究，樊星，马树才，朱连洲：通过构建中国能源CGE模型，在模型中引入碳税和碳排放变量，细化出能源部门，并将煤炭、石油和天然气三种主要能源作为生产要素，设定节能减排基准情景，针对碳减排、碳税和能源结构调整这三个不同的能源政策对经济发展以及碳排放的冲击效果进行了模拟分析。模拟结果表明，单一的能源政策总有不足之处，要么减排效果欠佳，要么严重制约经济发展，因此国家应该将减排政策系统化，，构造一个适应现实需要的低碳经济政策体系。 云南省发展低碳经济的路径研究，王剑芳，赵光洲，孙立新（2014）：针对云南省产业结构比重不合理、工业化和城市化正处于初期向中期迈进，以煤炭为主的单一能源结构等现状和特点，分析了云南省发展低碳经济面临的困境和挑战，指出只有依托观念创新、制度创新和科技创新，大力发展循环经济、可再生能源、低碳农业，增加森林碳汇能力，进行产业结构与能源结构调整，才是云南省发展低碳经济的现实选择，也是走可持续发展的必然要求。 西北地区能源消费、经济增长与碳排放的关系研究，张晓燕，孙志忠（2014）：能源消费、碳排放与经济增长之间的关系研究对实施节能减排、发展低碳经济具有至关重要的意义。该文基于西北五省统计年鉴数据，测算了1992-2011年煤炭、石油、天然气三种能源的碳排放量，并从近似关系和脱钩关系两个角度刻画了能源消费、碳排放量与经济增长之间的关系。结果表明：从1992-2011年，西北地区碳排放总量及煤炭、石油、天然气引起的碳排放量总体呈上升趋势，碳排放主要来源于煤炭消费；西北地区能源消费总量与碳排放总量的变动趋势近似，能源强度与碳排放强度的变动趋势近似。 我国能源消耗碳排放量测度及其趋势研究，孙涛，赵天燕（2014）：在深入分析相关文献以及考察当前我国能源消耗碳排放量现状的基础上，对我国经济增长中能源消耗产生的碳排放量进行测度，并根据有关历史数据，就我国能源消耗过程中碳排放趋势进行检验，研究结果表明，我国经济增长中的人均二氧化碳排放量均呈现弱“N”型变化趋势。 我国发展低碳经济面临的问题与对策研究，程瓯（2014）：低碳经济是以低能耗、低排放为基础的经济发展模式，是能源技术和减排技术的创新，、产业结构和制度结构的创新和人类生存发展观念的转变。 我国东中西部典型城市EKC曲线的阶段判断，王西琴，杜倩倩，张远（2013）：在东中西部分别选择两个典型城市，分析环境库兹涅茨曲线及其所处的阶段，从污染物排放、产业结构、技术水平、环境保护投资等几个方面，比较分析这些因素对EKC曲线的影响，结果表明，东部地区的两个城市已进入倒“U”型EKC曲线下降阶段；中部地区两个城市处于倒“U”型EKC曲线上升阶段的后期；西部地区两个城市处于倒“U”型曲线的上升阶段。 上海市经济增长与能源结构、产业结构关联状况的研究，梁日忠（2014）：文章在统计分析2000-2011年上海市能源消耗数据的基础上，以Tapio脱钩弹性指标为手段，研究上海市2001-2011年能源消费结构、产业结构与经济增长的脱钩关系及程度，分析能源消费结构、产业结构与经济增长关联状况的时间演变趋势。结果表明：2001-2011年上海市经济增长与能源消费总量间总体上处于弱脱钩状态。 山东省经济增长与碳排放的关系研究，赵玉焕，王邵军（2013）：针对经济增长与碳排放关系这一问题，利用灰色关联系数对山东省经济增长与碳排放的关系进行了研究，测算了1990-2009年山东省的碳排放量，运用灰色关联系数分析了山东省的经济增长与碳排放的关系。结果表明：随着经济增长，山东省的碳排放呈现整体上升的趋势；山东省的经济增长与碳排放的关联程度并不显著。 能源消费与经济增长非线性动态关系研究，梁经纬，刘金兰，柳洲（2014）：利用两区制马尔科夫状态转移模型对我国1953-2008年的能源消费与经济增长相互关系进行刻画，结果表明：我国的能源消费与经济增长之间的相互关系呈现明显的动态区制转移和非对称性；在经济适度增长时期，能源消费与经济增长之间的关系符合增长理论，在经济快速增长时期，能源消费与经济增长之间符合反馈理论；脉冲响应函数分析表明能源消费与经济增长之间存在着长期的相互作用。 能源消费、碳排放和经济增长关系的实证性研究，姚韬（2014）：通过运用协整检验和VAR模型，对能源消费、碳排放和经济增长的相关性进行了实证分析，计量结果表明我国的碳排放量、能源工业增加值、能源消费弹性系数以及国内生产总值增长率之间存在着长期稳定的均衡关系。其中我国碳排放量大小的变动对经济增长的影响较为显著。对我国目前而言，必须尽快加大第三产业在国民经济中的比重，特别是积极发展能耗低且附加值高的现代服务业，加快经济结构向能源集约型的转变。 基于状态空间模型的中国能源消费与经济增长关系研究，马颖，孙猛（2012）：以能源消费为分析主线，建立了中国1978-2010年能源消费与经济增长之间的变参数空间模型，并运用格兰杰因果检验、协整检验、脉冲响应等多种方法，检验能源消费与经济发展之间的动态关系，从而得出中国能源消费与经济增长之间的运行规律。 基于异质性假设的我国碳排放的EKC再检验，乎蓝艺，蔡风景，李元（2013）：对中国大陆地区29个省份的二氧化碳排放量进行测算，并将其分为高排放高收入、低排放高收入、高排放低收入和低排放低收入四个不同区域，利用面板数据模型分析了我国二氧化碳的EKC曲线及其影响因素，实证结果表明，除高排放低收入地区外，其余区域的经济发展水平与二氧化碳排放量都存在倒“U”型关系，EKC曲线假说成立，能源强度、产业结构、城市化和国际贸易水平等对我国的二氧化碳排放具有显著的影响。 基于投入产出模型的天津市碳排放预测研究，王磊（2014）：应对气候变化已成为当前全世界所面临的国际环境问题。低碳发展作为应对气候变化，实现可持续发展的有效途径，已得到全世界的广泛认可。在对天津市历史碳排放情况进行测算与分析，剥离出影响区域碳排放水平的主要因素的基础上，参考十二五经济发展目标与低碳示范示点城市建设目标，建立了经济-能源投入产出模型，充分考虑中间产品使用导致的隐性二氧化碳排放，对未来区域碳