1. Micro-macro linkage
  2. Environment
Download icon

Linking a microsimulation model to a dynamic CGE model: Climate change mitigation policies and income distribution in Australia

  1. Hielke Buddelmeyer  Is a corresponding author
  2. Nicolas Hérault  Is a corresponding author
  3. Guyonne Kalb  Is a corresponding author
  4. Mark van Zijll de Jong  Is a corresponding author
  1. Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Australia
Research article
Cite this article as: H. Buddelmeyer, N. Hérault, G. Kalb, M. van Zijll de Jong; 2012; Linking a microsimulation model to a dynamic CGE model: Climate change mitigation policies and income distribution in Australia; International Journal of Microsimulation; 5(2); 40-58. doi: 10.34196/ijm.00071
5 figures and 5 tables

Figures

Average real net income per adult equivalent by income quintile: percentage deviations from the reference case.
Average real net income per adult equivalent by quintile in the reference case (in financial year 2005/2006 dollars).
Average real net income per adult equivalent by household type: deviations from the reference case.
Gini coefficient within income quintiles: deviations from the reference case.
Gini coefficient by household type: deviations from the reference case.

Tables

Table 1
Computation of household real income for one particular household.
2005 (base) 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Nominal household income y0 y1 y2 y3 y4 y5
Cumulative price changes (63×1 vector) P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
Budget shares (63×1 vector) B0 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5
Real household income y0 y1B0.P1 y2B1.P2 y3B2.P3 y4B3.P4 y5B4.P5
Table 2
Household income (in millions of dollars).
2005/2006 financial year CGE model (MMRF) MS model (MITTS)
Total household income 886,422 562,478
 Labour 447,962 371,716
 Non-labour factor income 361,125 121,770
 Individual benefit payments 77,336 68,992
  Unemployment benefits 5,665 5,758
  Disability support pension 8,257 7,148
  Age pension 21,407 22,477
  Other individual benefit payments 42,007 33,609
Direct taxes on individuals 114,624 113,795
Direct taxes on enterprises 45,435 NA
Household disposable income 726,363 448,683
Table 3
Aggregate income results: reference case.
2005 (base) 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
The MS model (MITTS) $m/year Cumulative percentage changes
Gross income 494,341 22.8 37.2 55.0 75.4 96.8
Benefit payments 65,936 1.3 9.2 17.9 26.9 35.7
Income taxes + Medicare levy − rebates 123,195 22.3 35.2 50.6 68.9 88.4
Net income 440,137 19.6 33.3 50.3 69.5 89.4
Gross income + benefits 560,277 20.3 33.9 50.6 69.7 89.6
The CGE model (MMRF)
Gross income + benefits 886,422 20.9 33.4 49.6 68.6 88.7
Employment in 1000s 10,058 12.4 20.0 25.9 31.2 36.4
Basic necessities (a) 48.4 −1.4 −2.8 −4.6 −6.2 −7.7
Energy bundle (a) 11.6 −0.1 −0.5 −1.2 −1.7 −2.2
The MS model (MITTS) Percentage
Average tax rate 24.9 24.8 24.6 24.2 24.0 23.9
Benefit payments/Gross income 13.3 11.0 10.6 10.1 9.7 9.2
  1. (a)

    Note: (a) Aggregate budget shares at percentage points. the national level (in per cent). Changes are expressed in percentage points.

Table 4
Lump sum transfers to households.
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Amounts in $ per year per capita
Government handout Reference Case 0 274 475 855 1,149 1,411
Scenario – 550ppm 0 274 303 546 760 948
Scenario – 450ppm 0 274 190 437 650 845
Exogenous change in household income from carbon permit revenue Reference Case 0 0 0 0 0 0
Scenario – 550ppm 0 0 495 584 663 699
Scenario – 450ppm 0 0 727 844 928 939
Total transfer Reference Case 0 274 475 855 1,149 1,411
Scenario – 550ppm 0 274 798 1,130 1,423 1,647
Scenario – 450ppm 0 274 917 1,280 1,577 1,785
As a percentage of GDP
Total transfer Reference Case 0 0.50 0.81 1.36 1.71 1.98
Scenario – 550ppm 0 0.50 1.37 1.81 2.16 2.36
Scenario – 450ppm 0 0.50 1.57 2.06 2.40 2.58
Table 5
Ratio of new weights to original sample weights: reference case.
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Decile 1 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.59 0.53 0.47
Decile 2 0.77 0.79 0.82 0.80 0.77 0.71
Decile 3 0.87 0.90 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.91
Decile 4 0.94 0.99 1.05 1.09 1.08 1.07
Decile 5 1.02 1.08 1.16 1.22 1.26 1.28
Decile 6 1.10 1.18 1.27 1.38 1.42 1.50
Decile 7 1.18 1.30 1.44 1.55 1.69 1.77
Decile 8 1.30 1.45 1.61 1.77 1.95 2.15
Decile 9 1.51 1.76 1.94 2.15 2.40 2.71
  1. Note: This table should be read as follows: for 10 per cent of the records, the ratio of the new weight for 2005 (after reweighting) to the original sample weight is smaller than 0.64. For another 10 per cent of the records it is higher than 1.51.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)