Abstract
Carbon trading faces pushback over concerns of increasing copollutant exposure for minorities. Combining federal and state data I evaluate three questions concerning the distribution of hazardous air pollutants after implementation of California’s greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program. Did air toxic releases from facilities covered by the GHG program upwind of minorities disproportionately increase? Did minority communities suffer a disproportionate increase in cumulative exposure from covered facilities? Did minorities overall suffer higher exposure to air toxics from all sources relative to a counterfactual no-cap-and-trade scenario? Results suggest that covered facilities upwind of minorities did not have higher releases, and minority communities experienced a relative reduction in cumulative exposure from them. Under all policy scenarios minorities have a less desirable exposure distribution than whites. However, both demographic groups have a better air toxic exposure distribution with the cap-and-trade program than in a counterfactual without.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 137-170 |
Number of pages | 34 |
Journal | Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jan 2024 |
Keywords
- air pollution
- air toxics
- climate policy
- distributional analysis
- environmental justice
- GHG cap and trade
- inequality
- TRI
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics
- Nature and Landscape Conservation
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law