Replication Data for: Expert Views on Carbon Pricing in the Developing World

Carbon pricing has gained momentum over the past decade, with many developing countries either considering or implementing direct carbon pricing mechanisms. However, the factors that cause policymakers to prefer some policy designs over others remain uncertain. We argue that expert assessments of carbon pricing primarily center on economic efficiency and distributional concerns, which respectively affect perceptions of technical efficacy and political feasibility. Leveraging a unique conjoint experiment with carbon pricing experts in developing countries, we examine how aspects of policy design influence effectiveness and feasibility before empirically exploring how experts weigh these factors against each other. Design choices that alter the costs and benefits of carbon pricing affect perceptions of the policy's effectiveness and feasibility, often in opposing directions. Experts are split over which goal is more important overall, preferring political feasibility when distributing costs but weighing effectiveness and feasibility similarly when distributing benefits. Our findings highlight the challenge of balancing the ambition and political risk of carbon pricing, a tension that informs the policy recommendations of developing country experts.在过去十年间，碳定价（Carbon Pricing）的推广势头日益强劲，诸多发展中国家要么正在酝酿直接碳定价机制，要么已正式实施。然而，究竟哪些因素会推动政策制定者优先选择特定的政策设计方案，目前仍不明确。我们认为，专家对碳定价的评估主要围绕经济效率与分配公平关切两大维度，二者分别会影响专家对政策技术效能（Technical Efficacy）与政治可行性（Political Feasibility）的认知。本研究借助一项针对发展中国家碳定价专家开展的独特联合分析实验（Conjoint Experiment），首先分析了政策设计的不同维度如何影响政策效能与可行性，随后实证探究了专家如何对各类影响因素进行权衡取舍。那些会改变碳定价成本与收益的政策设计选择，往往会从相反方向影响专家对政策效能与可行性的认知。专家们在“整体而言哪一目标更为重要”这一问题上存在分歧：在分配政策成本时，专家更倾向于优先保障政治可行性；而在分配政策收益时，专家对效能与可行性的重视程度则较为相近。本研究结果凸显了平衡碳定价政策雄心与政治风险的挑战，这一内在张力也为发展中国家专家的政策建议提供了依据。