The document "La transition énergétique vue par les modèles macroéconomiques" by France Stratégie explores the impact of energy transition through four macroeconomic models: Mésange, Némésis, ThreeME, and Imaclim-R France. The aim is to understand how different economic policies can trigger and support this transition, focusing on long-term growth effects and potential short-term or structural policies to ease economic adjustments.
Key findings include:
-
Energy Price Increase: Models generally agree that a rise in energy costs has a substantial negative effect on economic activity, which persists even in the long run. Imaclim-R France shows more severe short-term impacts but better long-term outcomes compared to other models.
-
Employment and Wages: The response varies across models, highlighting the importance of labor market flexibility for distributing the effects of rising energy costs and enhancing the efficiency of recycling funds from potential energy taxes.
-
Carbon Emissions Reduction: The reduction in carbon emissions resulting from energy price hikes is similar across models, with all projecting a decrease of about 15% of baseline emissions over time due to a carbon tax equivalent to 1% of GDP. The pace of emission reduction differs between models, but they all indicate that at least half of this reduction is achieved within three years.
-
Final Energy Consumption and Intensity: Responses differ significantly among models. In some, such as ThreeMe and Imaclim-R France, CO2 reductions are linked to lower energy intensity (around 10% reduction in the long term). However, in others like Némésis, CO2 reductions mainly come from switching between more or less polluting sources, leading to only a 3% reduction in energy intensity in the long term.
These contrasting results highlight differing technological assumptions in each model, influencing policy recommendations that aim to promote an energy transition. It's emphasized that effectively recycling revenues from energy taxes is crucial, with empirical literature suggesting that such recycling should favor supply-side measures rather than demand-side measures to offset the long-lasting negative effects of energy taxation. This approach should also consider mitigating the loss of purchasing power experienced by low-income households or those in poverty.
