Presentation from OECD Expert Workshop on Environmental Policies: Social and Economic Outcomes 23-24 June 2022

1. OECD Expert Workshop on Environmental Policies: Social and Economic
Outcomes
Vincent MARCUS
Department of Economics and Policies Assessment
24 juin 2022

2. Setting the scene…
7,2
4,5
8,7
7,2
4,5
7,2
4,8
4,1
3,4
2,1
16,0
10,5
8,7
15,3
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
q1 q2 q3 q4 q5
Quintiles de revenu total par UC
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
facture Logement TTC facture Transport TTC
factures en € Taux d'effort, en % du revenu total du ménage
TEE total moyen
TEE net du chèque énergie
Taux d'effort de la fiscalité énergétique (yc TVA)
0
5
10
15
20
25
q1 q2 q3 q4 q5
Distributions des taux d'effort énergétique
parmi les ménages, selon le quintile de revenu total par UC
3e quartile Q3
moyenne
médiane
1er quartile
Q1
taux d'effort, en % du revenu total du ménage
…with still large heterogeneity
within income groups
Direct energy expenditures (housing,
transports) are strongly regressive
along income groups

3. Setting the scene…
0
1 000
2 000
3 000
4 000
5 000
6 000
Facture
totale
Énergies du
logement
… facture
nette du
chèque
énergie
Carburants
Distributions des factures énergétiques
parmi les ménages
9e décile D9
3e quartile Q3
moyenne
médiane
1er quartile Q1
1er décile D1
en euros
8,3
7,7
7,1
4,8
4,5
3,5 3,3
2,1
9,4
3,9
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Commune rurale
(22%)
Unité urbaine de moins
de 20,000 habitants
(18%)
Unité urbaine de
20,000 à 200,000
habitants (19%)
Unité urbaine de
200,000 à 1,999,999
habitants (25%)
Unité urbaine de Paris
(17%)
Zone d'habitation
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
8,0
10,0
12,0
14,0
16,0
18,0
20,0
facture Logement TTC facture Transport TTC
factures, en € taux d'effort, en % du revenu total du ménage
TEE total moyen
Taux d'effort de la fiscalité énergétique (yc TVA)
Heterogeneity within transports bills
= 3 times housing bills
Heterogeneity along urban/rural dimension

4. …towards yellow jackets on stage
Commune rurale (22%)
24
19
9
6
4
48
31
21
14
5
48
30
15
11
4
0
10
20
30
40
50
q1 q2 q3 q4 q5
Quintiles de revenu total par UC
Composante carbone - Logement
Composante carbone - Transport
Composante carbone - Total
en %
In rural areas, within lowest income groups (1st quintile), almost
50% belong to the most impacted households (ie twice the median
extra cost (as % income) due to carbon tax)

5. Low-income households car fleet :
2/3 are polluting vehicules
Source : CGDD, enquête Parc Auto 2018 Kantar TNS
Low-income households own :
17% of total households car
fleet,
but represent :
16% of total CO2 emissions
19% of total emissions of Nox
21% of total emissions of PM
Crit’Air = categories of +/- polluting vehicules, based on Euro Norm
0 = VE
1 = hydrid, NG, or Petrol (Euro VI), diesel excluded

6. Restricted access to low-emissions zone
Eastern localities : highest share of
most polluting vehicules…
…and lower income

7. Car scrapping scheme
• Objective of the measure : accelerate the energy transition of the automobile
fleet by providing a financial incentive for households and enterprises
Replacement of older vehicles (polluting vehicles)
by vehicle more efficient, less polluting
It complements existing bonus/penalty policy
• Created in 2015 (<30 000)
2018 : expansion of the allocation’s terms : age of the vehicle scrapped + purchase of
combustion second hand vehicle <130 gCO2/km
250 000 attributions in 2018
2019 : improved targeting of beneficiairies : very modest annual income and motorists
who drive long distances
340 000 attributions in 2019

8. Car scrapping scheme
• Distribution of beneficiaries (2019 premium scale) :
- Mainly non-taxable households
- Specification of beneficiairies
• Mainly diesel vehicle :
- 85 % of the scrapped vehicles are diesel
Non taxable

9. A double-dividend ?
Performing cost-benefit
analysis
Environnemental benefits
: (CO2, fine particles,
Nox)
User benefits (including all
taxes) : gains in fuel
consumption, gains in
maintenance costs,
extra cost due to the
anticipation of the
purchase of a new and
more efficient vehicle
Socioeconomic
assessment :
environmental
assessment + user
assessment (without
taxes)
Welfare benefits are high for low income househodls (< 13 489)

10. Challenges ahead
I. Stay « focus » and on track
Ex 1 : for the recovery plan in covid-crisis, criteria for the scrapping
scheme were « soften »
Ex 2 : in the current energy crisis, general « short-term » rebates on
energy consumption taxes lead to a higher share of public support
to higher income households (as they drive more…)
=> targeted support to low income/vulnerable is better
II. Capturing heterogeneity vs administrative efficiency
and burden
III. Incentives, Subsidies, Alternatives, Funding….the
squared circle?
Welfare benefits per vehicule

11. Thank you !
Q&A
contact : vincent.marcus@developpement-durable.gouv.fr
Please visit our website for further information : https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/collection-thema