Full Text

Turn on search term navigation

1. Introduction

The new edition of The Global Risks Report 2021 highlighted the potential negative impact of the intensification of the climate crisis on the expectation of economic growth worldwide in 2021 and moving forward [1]. According to the report, post-pandemic recovery plans should focus on aligning growth and sustainability agendas, to rebuild a better world. There are high-profile debates regarding alternative economic policies and instruments that can be used to address climate change fairly and effectively, involving international discussions [2,3,4] on avoiding carbon leakage to those countries where environmental legislation is weaker [5]. To deal with this challenge, several countries, states and even cities have been using carbon pricing instruments to drive economic agents toward a low-emission-based development path [6,7], which is why interest in and the development of research related to climate policies has skyrocketed in recent years [8,9,10,11].

Carrying out a regional cut of carbon emissions, in the context of the European Green Deal, the European Commission and the European Parliament have proposed to intensify Europe’s ambitions for reaching its 2030 climate targets. In December 2020, the European Council agreed to revise its climate target to achieve a reduction of at least 55% of greenhouse gases (GHG) by 2030 (relative to figures in 1990) [12,13]. This leads to important questions regarding economic consequences, not only at the European Union (EU) level but also on a national scale.

Focusing particularly on Austria, the country’s climate policy is characterized by a wide variety of political tools, such as regulatory requirements, economic tools (mainly subsidies) and awareness campaigns [14,15,16,17]. Considering the multi-dimensional nature of climate policy, governance is fragmented among national, regional, and local spheres. It should be noted that the provinces (Bundesländer, in German) also perform an essential role in the national climate policy in Austria, as some key topics on the climate agenda are within their jurisdiction, for example, spatial planning, housing subsidies and building regulations [18].

According to Austria’s Annual Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2020, the national total GHG emissions, not including land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), amounted to 73.6 Mt of CO₂ equivalents (CO₂e) in 2020 [19]. The dominant industrial sector is energy (68% of total national GHG emissions in 2020), followed by “industrial processes and other products” (21% in 2020) and agriculture (9.5% in 2020). The most important gas contributing to emissions is carbon dioxide (CO₂), representing 84% of the total 2020 emissions (without LULUCF), mainly resulting from combustion activities, with the transport sector being the largest source of energy-related CO₂ emissions (42.7% in 2020) [19].

As an EU member state, Austria’s climate policy is guided by the EU’s climate policies: the 2020 climate package and the 2030 climate framework. There are specific targets for the ETS and non-ETS sectors. The non-ETS sectors include the transport, residential and commercial, non-ETS industry and energy, agriculture, and waste management sectors. The Austria 2020 Energy Policy Review report, developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA), stated that Austria managed to keep its annual GHG emissions below the trajectory for the non-ETS sectors until 2017 [18]. However, from 2017 onwards, the country’s emissions exceeded their agreed annual level, especially due to emissions from the transport sector, which could undermine Austria’s chances of reaching the 2020 and 2030 targets. As the new government is committed to the climate agenda, market solutions gain prominence, such as increasing fossil fuel taxes, putting a price on carbon emissions in sectors not covered by the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), or even developing a national ETS system, as currently discussed.

Given the national context and that some questions remain unanswered, it is relevant to verify and evaluate the state of scientific research on carbon pricing in Austria [20]. Therefore, this study inspects the scientific publications using bibliometric analysis techniques, combined with a systematic literature review (SLR). The main research question is: what is the current state of play and what are the perspectives on carbon pricing in Austria? This study seeks to provide academics and practitioners with a wide view of Austrian carbon pricing policies, identifying new approaches and/or hot topics related to them. These analyses may be useful for discussions regarding Austrian climate policy, suggesting future research directions and providing a benchmark for related and comparable analyses aimed at monitoring future developments in this new topic.

In terms of the way that this paper is organized, this section presents the research motivation and justification. Section 2 delves into the methodology undertaken in this article. Section 3 shows the trend of scientific articles on climate policy and carbon pricing in Austria, in addition to discussing the main results related to the bibliometric analysis, while Section 4 deepens the SLR, providing a schematic overview of the literature. Section 5 furthers the discussion of the five main research topics identified in SLR: climate policy, energy and industry, transport, AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use), and cities and buildings. Finally, Section 6 summarizes the conclusions and the implications of the article.

2. Methodological Procedures

2.1. Bibliometric Analysis

Bibliometric analysis is a leading research tool that comprises a collection of statistical techniques that aims to identify research hotspots and trends based on bibliographic metadata [21,22]. There are several reasons to adopt bibliometric techniques for analysis. One may seek an overview of the scientific literature on a given topic or even use them to deepen traditional reviews that provide a critical and/or subjective summary of selected documents [23]. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that studies based on data have been gaining prominence when compared to those with (more) subjective analyses. Besides, these techniques have already been used to study climate topics [24,25,26,27,28].

2.1.1. Definition of the Database

The processing of bibliometric data begins with the selection of the database(s) for subsequent filtering and refinement of the data [29]. Such an analysis is generally developed using one of three standard databases: Scopus, Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar [30,31]. To ensure the high quality of the metadata, in our study, we opt to use only Scopus and the WoS [32].

2.1.2. Data Collection

Given the subject “carbon pricing”, a preliminary literature review was conducted to select the most frequent keywords. Then, a systematic literature review (SLR) was performed using the identified keywords as search strings [29,33]. The period adopted as the date parameter for the search in Scopus and WoS was not restricted; as a result, studies published from 1977 to January 2021 were included (Figure 1).

2.1.3. Refinement of the Search Results and Data Analysis

The bibliometric analysis was developed using the Biblioshiny software interface from the R-package Bibliometrix [34]. In the screening step (Figure 1), only articles published in indexed journals were considered due to their scientific relevance and verified metadata quality [35]. In addition, as a good practice to avoid bias in the distribution of publications across time, considering that the search in the Scopus and WoS databases was carried out on 21 January 2021, 3 articles published in 2021 were excluded from the bibliometric analysis.

2.2. Systematic Literature Review (SLR)

We conducted a systematic survey (Figure 1) based on the PRISMA protocol [36] to evaluate the carbon pricing research status in Austria. We used the 81 articles from the bibliometric section as input for the SLR; we also included the 3 articles from 2021 (up until January 2021), resulting in 84 articles. The aim of the SLR is to perform an in-depth content analysis to understand the present stage of carbon pricing in Austria. All titles and abstracts were independently inspected by two researchers, in line with the following eligibility criteria [37], to determine the primary sample of the study:

Directly associated with the climate policy and carbon pricing theme;
Specifically related to Austria.

3. Bibliometric Results

3.1. Research Trends

Keywords Trends

There are two types of keywords to be evaluated when performing thematic trending: authors’ keywords and “Keywords Plus”. The former is provided by the authors of the article, while the latter is extracted from the articles’ references [22]. Figure 2 provides the most frequent words. “Austria”, “carbon dioxide” and “environmental policy” are the top 3 words, which is in line with the clustering analysis shown in Table 1. As stated in Table 1, we defined four clusters according to time period, excluding the year 2021. From the keywords of the most frequent authors in each cluster, we could identify the central topic per time period in terms of Austrian climate policy (Table 1).

The cumulative frequency of the keywords “Austria” and “carbon dioxide” grew extensively in the last decade of articles using Keyword Plus (Figure 3), reinforcing the trend of increasing publications associated with climate change mitigation in Austria, as can also be observed in Figure 4. The growth of articles with an emphasis on Austria creates an important theoretical framework for future publications, enabling deeper discussions on the topic of climate change in the country. Previously, discussions have been largely focused on climate policy (Figure 4), which suggests the need for public policies aimed at sustainability to mitigate climate change [38]. The growth of the term “federalism” in the authors’ keywords also reinforces this hypothesis.

Table 1 tells us a great deal about the ongoing climate policy discussions in Austria. The analysis period covers forty-three years of scientific production (from 1977 to 2020). The first publication [39] was in 1977; it only appeared in the results because the paper contains several words from the search strings, however, it does not address our analyzed topic. The same can be said of a previous publication [40]. Therefore, article [41] was the first publication to specifically address carbon pricing in Austria. The paper discusses the potential for upgrading biomass fuels to produce other energy sources, such as electricity, gases, and transportation fuels. This particular topic starts appearing in 1997; until 2008, the research is highly concentrated on the biomass sector, as can be observed from keywords such as “biomass energy” and “biomass flows”, and on carbon emissions, from keywords such as “carbon sinks”. Some policy-oriented elements are also notable, such as “climate policy”, “CO₂ taxation” and “alternative energy”.

From 2009 to 2012, new elements appear, with a focus on political and economic perspectives (“climate policy”, “emissions trading”, “anti-leakage policy”, “carbon intensity of economy”), but the central sector that is covered is still bioenergy (“bioenergy policy” and “bioenergy with carbon capture and storage”). It was only during the period from 2013 to 2016 that the literature started to focus on carbon pricing and climate policies in Austria, as shown by the “climate change mitigation” and “emission scenario” keywords. In this period, we can also see the development of a local focus, one that is very much based on governance discussions (“Austria”, “environmental federalism”, “EU climate policy”, “federalism”, and “representative concentration pathway”). After this period (2017–2020), studies repeatedly discuss the topic in terms of the climate and energy agendas (“climate policy”, “climate change mitigation”, “emissions”, “energy”, and “energy transition”) and we also see the local perspective (“Austria”, “environmental federalism”, and “federalism”). An interesting point of recurrence in the articles is related to the national “carbon tax” discussions in the country.

4. Systematic Literature Review (SLR) Analysis

Table 2 brings the summary of the analysis of the 61 articles selected for the systematic literature review (Table 2).

5. Discussion

In addition to the 61 articles analyzed in the SLR, we also considered several official documents, besides scientific papers and reports written in German and English, in order to broaden our discussion. The additional documents are described in Table 3. In general, these additional studies examined energy policy and sustainability issues in the Austrian economy, showing their interactions with the energy system and the environment. Some have also focused on energy consumption and CO₂ emissions, or even on changes in behavior, along with the macroeconomic effects on economic growth and employment.

5.1. Climate Policy Trends

The climate policy integration (CIP) progress in Austria can be divided into four phases: (1) awareness (1990–1995), (2) stagnation (1995–2002), (3) the EU influence (2002–2007) and (4) legislation (2007–2014) [65]. Phase 1 was colored by growing concern about natural resource protection. At that time, Austria was recognized as an ambitious pioneer in terms of its climate policy [57]. For example, in 1996, Austria established the Austrian Council on Climate Change (ACCC), which is responsible for developing research on the topic of climate change [58]. In phase 2, there were no great advances in terms of the environmental agenda. As Austria joined the EU, many environmental targets became regulated at the EU level, which, in practical terms, meant less ambitious targets than in phase 1. The economic recession also contributed to weaker environmental targets [65].

In phase 3, climate change mitigation measures grew stronger, paving the way for newly emerging policies, such as Austria’s first Federal Climate Strategy in 2002 [66,67]. Market-oriented instruments, such as higher taxes on coal-based energy, were also implemented. Environmental law marked phase 4. At this time, Austria formulated its first “Energy Strategy” and climate protection act [65]. In 2011, the Climate Change Centre Austria (CCCA) was founded to promote climate research to support policymaking [59]. At the same time, the Austrian Climate Change Act (CCA) fixed a target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 16% for all non-ETS sectors by 2020, compared to 2005 [63]. The Austrian CCA was the only EU CCA containing a short-term target for 2020, highlighting the need for further long-term planning for decarbonization in the EU [63].

Between 2007 and 2017, during the tenure of the conservative right-wing governments, little progress was observed in climate change mitigation actions in Austria [56]. The radical right-wing Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ—Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, in German), for example, spoke out against the Paris Agreement. It is clear that the strength of low-carbon energy policies differs according to the ideological perspectives of the political parties involved [56]. In the European context, left-wing governments have historically been more sensitive to environmental agendas. This can be explained by the fact that the green parties are usually left-wing parties [69]. Furthermore, media coverage also plays an important role in political and cultural inclination [59].

The Paris Agreement represents a significant step forward in the global awareness of human responsibility regarding climate change. The level of environmental activism increased at the same time, motivated by the strengthening of young leaders, as with Greta Thunberg. However, the practical effects of the agreement were greatly harmed by denialist governments, such as Donald Trump in the US, who consistently acted against the objectives of the Paris Agreement [100]. Besides, the lack of uniformity in the way that nations face the issue of emissions can unfairly affect the cost of production in countries that are most committed to the environment, since some emitters insist on neglecting the externalities of their productive activities [101]. Nevertheless, despite the relevance of global policies and movements after the 2015 Paris agreement in terms of climate policy integration, the literature is still scarce on this topic [100].

5.2. Energy Policy and Governance

Despite an increase in the last ten years, Austria has awarded relatively low importance to energy research [50,82]. In general, renewable energy and energy efficiency are strongly prioritized agendas, relative to other areas such as fossil and nuclear energy. Historically, research related to biomass has also been given great importance [83,116]. Currently, the energy sector in Austria has one of the lowest emission intensities among IEA countries. In addition, the country is committed to rapidly phasing out coal-fired power generation, given the rising CO₂ prices under the EU ETS and the fact that power plants are nearing the end of their economic life [18]. We highlight that Austria has also set a target for 100% renewable electricity consumption by 2030 in its #mission2030 and the National Energy Climate Plan (NECP).

In this context, the scarcity of fossil fuels, especially oil, has contributed to an emerging debate about cities’ resilience [44]. Austria aims to phase out oil- and coal-fired heating systems by 2035; oil consumption has already declined by 35% from 2008 to 2018 [18]. The use of renewable energies and more energy-efficient buildings has been responsible for reducing 37.2% of building emissions in Austria since the 1990s [49]. In the city of Güssing, for example, a large part of the municipal energy demand is provided by renewable resources; in 2013, it even reached 100% [43]. Following this approach, a previous study [53] identified great potential for heating and cooling energy from geothermal sources in Vienna. However, despite federal subsidies for retrofitting buildings [68], advancing clean energy cannot supply all Austrians satisfactorily. The main reasons for this are budgetary constraints, such as high investment costs for adapting the heating systems [49] and provincial budget cuts in recent years [68]. It should be noted that about 1.6 million Austrian residential buildings were constructed before 1990 [18].

In 2016, buildings contributed 16.0% of Austria’s total carbon emissions [49]. Given the alpine climate in Austria, most of the energy demand in buildings is due to heating demands. In 2017, space heating accounted for 71% of the total energy demand [18]. To meet this demand sustainably, new energy technologies and equipment retrofits are promising fields of study [48]. As an example, we can highlight woody biomass use for producing heat and electricity [47]. The use of wood pellets for heat and electricity production, in place of fossil-based fuels, has increased more than 18 times from 2000 to 2015 in the EU-28 [45]. This is a significant breakthrough since oil-based heating accounts for half of the direct CO₂ emissions from buildings [18]. Wood can also be used in urban construction, contributing to low-carbon buildings. For instance, the city of Vienna currently has the world’s tallest timber building, known as HoHo tower [52].

Faced with these issues, an “Energy encouragement policy” would permanently affect clean energy consumption, in addition to the subsequent economic aggregates related to clean energy consumption [72]. Looking at the carbon impacts of smart grid development, the authors of [73] concluded that there is further potential for emissions reduction in Austria, but the targets are very unlikely to be reached without regulatory support for user engagement in demand response, along with enabling technology and support programs. Finally, the authors of [79] found that social factors are important for sustainable energy transition, based on inclusive, transparent and participatory decision-making processes, as well as being fundamental to the need for participatory governance and stakeholder engagement.

In Austria, energy consumption is directly affected by the municipalities’ size. In smaller municipalities, residential purposes and mobility are the main drivers of energy consumption, while in larger cities, industry, public and private services are predominant [42]. Although some of Austria’s cities, such as Vienna, already have their own climate change program [46], most provinces in Austria do not implement green building standards or promote housing schemes voluntarily, but only do so after federal and/or EU interventions [51]. This demonstrates the need for the regional climate agenda to mature.

From a political perspective, federalism implies greater political autonomy for a country’s provinces. In Austria, federalism has historically had a negative influence on building policies since regional interests often conflict with global commitments [51]. Other authors [68] argue that each environmental problem demands a specific governance level; for example, Austria’s federalism is quite efficient in managing flood risk management. The fact is that as global commitments are assumed to be agreed upon at the federal level without consulting the provinces, the unfolding of such global targets domestically becomes a huge challenge [51]. Besides, short-term policies usually win more votes, therefore the climate agenda ends up taking a back seat [43]. As a result, poor provincial collaboration contributed to Austria missing the Kyoto target by about 19% [38,68].

When it comes to industry, the sector accounted for 34% of the total final consumption (TFC) of energy in 2018. Around 15% of industrial sector GHG emissions are not covered by the EU ETS. The authors of [18] report that natural gas is the largest source of energy used by the Austrian industry (32% of total consumption), followed by electricity (26%), oil (19%) and bioenergy and waste (16%). According to the authors of [78], the new climate strategy of the Austrian government also sheds light on waste heat from industries. The authors analyzed large-scale industrial waste heat utilization in urban district heating networks; they concluded that a further reduction of approximately 44% in CO₂ emissions can be achieved.

The authors of [71] analyzed European industry (EU-15) in terms of sustainability in the period from 1995 to 2005 under the EU ETS; they concluded that early actions (EA) accounted for a reduction of 21% in energy-related CO₂ emissions. Their results indicate that Austria would be better off under a regime of equal industrial quotas, as opposed to one that considers EA. Currently, Austria’s national policy for the industrial sector seeks a shift toward less carbon-intensive fuels and the more efficient use of resources in transformation and production processes [106].

In addition, while assessing the different sources of energy, it should be noted that the increasingly intensified cross-border electricity trade complicates the accounting of emissions from electricity consumption. In terms of Austria’s virtual net CO₂ imports, for example, 45% of total CO₂ emissions are incorporated in electricity consumption [81]. Besides, the decarbonization of the Austrian electricity system could be achieved sooner if carbon prices were high enough [80]. In addition, they also highlighted that onshore wind and solar energy are the main renewable electricity generation technologies. This is in line with the authors of [77], who concluded that if the transition to a low-carbon electricity system in Austria is to be achieved, higher shares of wind power may be needed after 2020. In addition, while investigating hydropower energy more closely, the authors of [75] examined public-private interactions in the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) and found that state government and traditional lobbying were the dominant patterns of interaction in Austria. Neither water management nor hydropower stakeholders have opted for more comprehensive ways of collaborating.

Finally, despite the importance of efforts to reduce production-based emissions, the authors of [62] also highlight the need for consumption-based emission policies for fighting global warming. This approach to emissions accounting includes the emissions generated during the production process of imported products. In Austria, more than 60% of them occur outside the country, and 34% are even outside the EU [15]. In the context of global supply chains, the authors of [54] point out that anti-leakage policies should be considered in the climate agenda. Nevertheless, if indirect production emissions are not also included in the country where those products are consumed, despite the reduction in global emissions, the gain will not materialize in the consumer GHG balance [60]. According to the authors of [74], 23% of global CO₂ emissions were traded internationally in 2004 and, in some wealthy countries such as Austria, more than 30% of consumption-based emissions were imported, representing a total net import of 4.7 tonnes of CO₂ per person in 2004.

5.3. Carbon Prices and Economic Outlook

The new and current government—a coalition between the Conservatives and the Greens—set the goal for the country to be carbon neutral by 2040 [102]. The Federal Chancellery of Austria (Bundeskanzleramt Österreich, in German) presented a plan to introduce a carbon price for emissions from sectors not covered by the EU ETS that include transport, residential and commercial sectors, non-ETS industry and power, agriculture, and waste management. Other relevant initiatives are the #mission2030 and the NECP. A task force is in place to launch a formal proposal by 2022 [102], so there are still uncertainties about the design of the carbon pricing instrument (carbon tax, ETS or a hybrid model), the institutional and regulatory framework, revenue recycling policies, impacts on sectoral GDP, competitiveness indicators and international trade. In addition, the method for assessing carbon leakage has yet to be defined, and the possible adoption of other climate policy instruments, such as carbon border taxes, is also still uncertain, as was recently mentioned by the Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, a traditional German newspaper [103].

Austria is among the 27 EU Member States, along with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, that constitute the EU ETS. The sectors covered include power and heat generation, energy-intensive industrial sectors and aviation within Europe [104]. Approximately 80% of GHG emissions from the electricity and industrial sectors are covered by EU ETS. However, transportation, residential and commercial sectors, industry, and power not covered by the EU ETS, agriculture, and waste management are not considered in this market. Additionally, EU carbon dioxide emission allowances have a statistically significant and positive long-term effect on the European electricity sector stock market [76]. Therefore, a more extensive ETS has the potential to stimulate company innovation. The authors also argue that the free allowance emission policy (grandfathering) was a limiting factor in stimulating innovations related to the mitigation of emissions of the EU ETS in Phases I and II. Therefore, they believe that the increased importance given to auctions in Phase III of the EU ETS could increase climate-related innovations in the region. In addition, the efficiency of the European climate policy could be even better if the number of allowances distributed for free was restricted to companies and sectors facing the risk of carbon leakage [70].

Diving into the historical series of Austrian GHG emissions from the non-EU-ETS sectors, the situation becomes even more complex [55,68] since these sectors are responsible for about 60% of the GHG emissions in Austria [105]. It highlights the urgent need to understand the present state of carbon pricing research in Austria, aiming to support policy discussions and guide future research. In this context, the authors of [61] applied a macroeconomic model to simulate the impacts of CO₂ tax rates and revenue recycling options in Austria. Until 2017, Austria managed to keep annual GHG emissions below the trajectory for non-EU ETS sectors, as defined in the CCA. However, as of this year, emissions have exceeded their mandatory annual level [18], particularly because of the recent growth of transport sector emissions that exceed projections [106]. Furthermore, the Austrian Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt, in German) frequently assesses the effectiveness of policies and measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions, in addition to developing emissions projections every two years. In its latest report, the Agency highlighted that the country is not on track to reach its goals [107].

Concerning the potential negative impact of the intensification of the climate crisis and the need to address sectors not covered by the EU ETS, the authors of [108] have developed different energy use scenarios for the economy of Austria, in order to evaluate the impacts of different climate and energy policy measures. They concluded that the existing national measures do not lead to a stabilization of the final energy demand, so the targeted stabilization of final energy consumption at the 2005 level in Austria will not be achieved. The authors proposed that the prices of CO₂ and energy would therefore have to be increased to achieve the corresponding technological progress and sustainable changes in behavior, regarding energy efficiency and final energy consumption. However, regarding climate policy instruments, discussions about the risk of carbon leakage were not assessed in this study; very little research has focused on this analysis—except for [5,54]—contributing to the vagueness of the method for assessing this topic in Austria.

When it comes to alternative policies and economic instruments that can be used to face climate change fairly and effectively, the authors of [109] conclude that households are affected differently by the use of different measures (e.g., CO₂ tax), depending on their income, living situation, and consumer behavior. The authors highlighted the fact that numerous conflicts of objectives arose; for example, households who live in rural areas with insufficient public transport frequency or public transport supply are harder hit because they will still need a car. Therefore, undesired social impacts must be reduced or avoided through financial support for households in need of protection [110,111,112].

Moreover, the redistribution of income is decisive for the slightly positive effects on GDP and employment [113]. Still considering the distributional impacts, the authors of [114] conclude that high investments are necessary in order to convert the capital stock relating to equipment (e.g., vehicles, machines) and buildings as quickly and in as climate-friendly a way as possible. These include the use of renewable electricity in the transport sector, the expansion of renewable energies in the energy sector, and efficiency measures in industry and in the building sector. Changes in behavior must complement the set of measures in order to achieve the CO₂ target. According to the authors, income from the taxation of climate-damaging behavior and the dismantling of environmentally counterproductive subsidies can help finance these measures. In addition, the distribution effects and reform options of selected energy policy measures were analyzed; the authors concluded that the quantification of the distribution effects of CO₂ taxes and changes in housing subsidies is not far advanced, so more studies addressing the impacts of different carbon pricing frameworks and designs for Austria should be developed [115]. In this regard, they suggested that the CO₂ card, which is currently not on the political agenda, should gain interest. The CO₂ card, also known as an emissions trading right for private households or carbon licenses, is based on the idea of extending emissions, trading to all areas of life, in order to control and reduce individual CO₂ emissions. The authors also suggested that, in the case of the CO₂ tax, the use of other types of funds (e.g., eco bonus) should also be analyzed in detail, in order to obtain a more extensive overview of the distribution effects of different types of compensation.

5.4. Urban Mobility and GHG Emissions

The transport sector was the largest contributor to the growth of total emissions in recent years in Austria [17]. In 2018, the sector accounted for 40% of total emissions, emitting 24.8 Mt CO₂ at the highest level, 1% above the previous peak in 2005 and 14% above the level in 2012 [18]. The new government’s policy is based on the provision of public transport and is committed to developing a detailed “2030 mobility master plan”. In addition, a shift to electric vehicles (EVs), the use of other alternative fuels, and a shift to multimodal mobility are supported. However, the government is not in favor of introducing a domestic tax on the carbon content of fuels used in the transport sector; the tax burden is now shifted to vehicles with above-average CO₂ emissions (through the registration tax, NoVA). The authors of [18] also shed light on the fact that lower fuel taxation in Austria makes fuel prices lower compared to neighboring countries, leading to a counteracting effect on emissions.

The authors of [98] conclude that market-oriented instruments, such as tax exemptions for electric vehicles or their exclusion from urban toll systems, generate little impact regarding the acquisition of these energy-efficient technologies, in addition to a direct rebound side effect. According to the authors, the overall impact of financial incentives in the transport sector is weak, as they only apply to specific technologies and neglect the indirect rebound effects, so taxes and subsidies have only a direct and short-term effect. Yet in the electric car discussion, the authors of [94] analyzed different policy instruments, including a CO₂ tax aiming to support the introduction of electric vehicles in Austria; they conclude that at that time, both CO₂ and fuel consumption taxes (MÖSt—Mineralölsteuer or mineral oil tax) would have had to be prohibitively high to make electric cars competitive. At the current time, where electric vehicles have a longer range, there are more charging stations and climate awareness has increased, this reality may certainly be different. Since introducing such levels of taxes did not seem to be politically feasible, an upfront price support system (e.g., direct financial support, exemption from registration tax, bonus/malus system) seemed to be preferable to taxation.

The authors of [19] point out the urgency of disruptive policies to reduce passenger transport emissions in industrialized countries. The efficacy of technological efficiency improvements in mitigating CO₂ emissions when using bigger, heavier and more powerful cars was the focus of an assessment by the authors of [96]. The authors conclude that policies aimed at reducing CO₂ emissions in passenger transport must address both the promotion of a low-carbon vehicle fleet and the reduction of the average mileage traveled by gasoline-powered cars. They recommend that transport policies favor vehicle and fuel taxation on low-carbon passenger vehicles, especially in the context of a tax reform. According to the authors of [9], it is possible to promote economic growth and the reduction of GHG emissions via the environmental tax reform of fossil fuel use in Austria.

Likewise, the authors of [109] conclude that efficiency measures and behavioral changes, such as fewer car purchases—in a scenario where there would be more public and alternative means of transport—would lead to an absolute decoupling of energy consumption and economic growth. Also concerning the transportation sector, the authors of [113] assessed options for greening the Austrian tax system; they conclude that opportunities for the further ecological orientation of the taxation system are found mainly in the area of transport, especially by increasing the fuel consumption tax (MÖSt). Moreover, the authors suggested that widening and raising NoVA rates or pricing road use that is contingent upon vehicle horsepower would also be options. Apart from the area of transport, it is also proposed that an increase in taxes on electricity and a “new” CO₂ tax would be worth considering. Furthermore, the authors of [109] also simulated a scenario where the expansion of e-mobility was strongly promoted (100% by 2045). They found out that a complete switch to electromobility is interesting; however, electromobility brings challenges for the network infrastructure and increases electricity consumption, so it should be combined with a general reduction in car journeys, as well as relying more on public transport and active transport, such as walking and cycling.

In addition, the authors of [95] assess the tourism footprint in Austria, considering different options in transportation. The authors highlight that land travel is the main mode of transport in Austria, although air travel has seen a significant increase in recent decades. They conclude that a reduction in annual emissions could be achieved through an increase in the price of air tickets compared to other transport options, a decrease in long-haul flights, and the promotion of land travel. Elsewhere, the authors of [99] estimate household carbon footprints by investigating the average carbon intensity of activities per hour. The authors conclude that time for oneself is relatively low-carbon, while household as well as leisure activities show large variations in terms of the CO₂ emissions footprint/h.

5.5. AFOLU and GHG Emissions

Most Austrian CH₄ and N₂O emissions derive from the agriculture sector [96]. Winkler and Winiwarter (2015) highlight the finding that 71% of these emissions are specifically from the livestock sector. These authors also point out that this sector has shown an upward trend in GHG emissions up to 2030. To deal with these questions, Gaube et al. (2009) propose a socio-ecological model or SERD to evaluate GHG emissions, C or N balance, along with the socioeconomic indicators of farms and households under different conditions (e.g., agricultural subsidies, prices and innovation). On the other hand, Hall (1997) and Breuss and Steininger (1998) argue that the field could contribute to combating global warming through biomass-derived electricity and heating. Schmidt et al. (2011) point out that a carbon tax on all fossil fuels would be a major step toward increasing the share of bioenergy in the energy supply.

According to the authors of [88], the key drivers for land-use change are agricultural funding policies, market prices and climate conditions. In this context, the authors of [90] propose an agent-based model to model the forest supply of timber in different market conditions in the province of Carinthia, Austria. The authors conclude that to reduce the carbon footprint of timber for heating purposes, traders should use resources close to the heating plant [90]. Besides, more efficient harvest techniques can reduce the carbon footprint of energy-intensive production systems during Austrian winters [91]. The authors also posit that food must come from local farms as often as possible since transport over long distances accounts for a significant part of food supply chain emissions [91].

Furthermore, the authors of [85] and [88] highlight the finding that land-use policies should take into account ecosystem services. For example, trade-offs related to land use can be found in biomass growth. However, the authors of [87] point out that the increased use of biomass to replace fossil energy may contribute to a reduction in the functioning of forests as a terrestrial carbon sink. It should be noted that CO₂ emissions need to decrease by over 100% (base year 2000) by 2100 in the most optimistic IPCC AR5 scenario to limit global warming to the 2 °C target [93]. Therefore, the capacity of ecosystems to act as vegetation carbon sinks are directly affected by land-use intensity and should be a central topic of attention [64].

6. Conclusions

In the bibliometric analysis, we found a low number of articles and only recent works on climate policy in Austria. The limited number of studies indicates incipient research on these topics in the country; published material was very concentrated from 2010 onward, with the number of publications increasing considerably since then.

Current literature on climate policy in Austria covers a wide range of climate policy instruments, including regulatory and economic mechanisms (mainly subsidies) as well as awareness campaigns targeting different groups, sectors, or activities. Furthermore, institutional responsibilities are fragmented in local, regional, and federal spheres. Austria’s climate policy is strongly guided by the EU’s climate policies: the climate package for 2020 and the climate framework for 2030. Notably, until 2017, Austria managed to keep its annual GHG emissions below the trajectory for sectors not covered by the EU ETS, but as of this year, emission levels are higher than expected. However, emissions exceeded their annual mandatory level after 2017, bringing some doubts about future emissions and the country’s engagement in relation to its climate policy.

Energy-related emissions are the main contributor to total GHG emissions in the country, having increased three years in a row (2015–2017), suggesting the need to develop new policies and additional actions. For example, it would be possible to improve monitoring systems, in addition to addressing the growth in energy consumption in the transport sector via taxation, as discussed in Section 4. Another possibility also previously discussed relates to the division of responsibilities between the different levels (federal, state, and municipal), in addition to the distribution of responsibilities between different ministries at the federal level itself, since there is no uniform legal basis for national actions to mitigate GHG emissions.

We also conclude that, despite the relevance of the transport and industrial sectors in terms of energy consumption and GHG emissions, they are neglected in terms of research focus. The transport sector accounted for 40% of total energy-related CO₂ emissions in 2018, contributing most to the growth in total emissions in recent years, so mitigation policies must be urgently addressed, such as further electric vehicle subsidies, the expansion of alternative fuels and technologies and the taxation of fossil fuels.

In its #mission2030 and the NECP, Austria has set the ambitious target of 100% renewable electricity consumption by 2030, aiming to drive the decarbonization of the electricity sector. We highlight that the new government is showing commitment to comprehensive tax reform, based on ecological and social principles, with the aim of pricing CO₂ emissions in sectors not covered by the EU ETS [18]. This would be achieved by introducing, for example, a CO₂ tax or a national ETS system.

From our main findings, we suggest the following recommendations in terms of topics to be addressed regarding the climate-oriented research agenda:

The Paris Agreement represents a significant step toward global awareness of human responsibility for climate change. Environmental activism increased at the same time, motivated by the strengthening of young leadership from individuals such as Greta Thunberg. However, the practical effects of the agreement were greatly harmed by denialist governments, such as that of Donald Trump in the US, that consistently acted against the objectives of the Paris Agreement [100]. Nevertheless, despite the relevance of global policies and movements after the 2015 Paris agreement in climate policy integration, the authors of [100] argue that studies are still scarce on this topic. Therefore, studies investigating climate policy integration after the 2015 Paris agreement would be very useful.
There are still uncertainties about the design of the carbon pricing instrument (carbon tax, ETS or a hybrid model), the institutional and regulatory framework, revenue recycling policies, impacts on sectoral GDP, competitiveness indicators and international trade [102]. In this context, simulation macroeconomic models would be very helpful.
The method for assessing carbon leakage has yet to be defined, and the possible adoption of other climate policy instruments, such as carbon border taxes, is also still uncertain, as recently mentioned by the Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung [103]. In view of that finding, studies focusing on the advantages and disadvantages of methods for assessing carbon leakage are needed.
Besides the importance of efforts to reduce production-based emissions, the authors of [62] also highlight the need for consumption-based emission policies for fighting global warming. Therefore, this may also represent a fertile research topic.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.S. and K.S.; methodology, L.S., K.S. and M.C.C.; software, L.S. and M.C.C.; validation, L.S. and K.S.; formal analysis, L.S., J.V.; data curation, M.C.C.; writing—original draft preparation, L.S.; writing—review and editing, L.S. and M.C.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Coimbra Group Scholarship Program for Young Professors and Researchers from Latin American Universities for supporting the development of this research at the Wegener Center for Climate and Global Change (Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Austria).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Bibliometric framework and further refinement of the search.

Figure 2. The ‘Keyword Plus’ word cloud. The Keyword Plus terms are extracted automatically from the articles’ references.

Figure 3. The ten most frequent keywords, in terms of cumulative occurrences over time.

Figure 4. The ten most frequent authors’ keywords, cumulative occurrence over time.

Table 1

The ten most frequent authors’ keywords, shown by cluster.

#	Clusters
#	1997–2008 (10 Articles)	2009–2012 (16 Articles)	2013–2016 (22 Articles)	2017–2020 (31 Articles)
1	Biomass energy	Climate policy	Climate policy	Climate policy
2	Allophane	Emissions trading	Climate change mitigation	Austria
3	Alternative energy	Agent-based model	Austria	Climate change
4	Austria	Anti-leakage policy	Climate change	Climate change mitigation
5	Biomass flows	Bioenergy policy	Emission scenario	Carbon tax
6	Carbon sequestration	Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage	Environmental federalism	Emissions
7	Carbon sinks	Biomass	EU climate policy	Energy
8	Carinthia	Black market products	Federalism	Energy transition
9	Climate policy	Carbon flow	Representative concentration pathway	Environmental federalism
10	CO₂ taxation	Carbon intensity of economy	Adaptation	Federalism

Table 2

Articles assessed by the SLR.

Authors	References	Journal	Title	Objetive/Method	Countries Included
(Abart-Heriszt et al., 2019)	[42]	ENERGIES	The Energy Mosaic Austria—A Nationwide Energy and Greenhouse Gas Inventory on Municipal Level as Action Field of Integrated Spatial and Energy Planning	The paper brings a new approach to developing a city-level energy and GHG inventory by means of spatial analysis, the Energy Mosaic of Austria (EMA).	Austria
(Azevedo et al., 2013)	[43]	ENERGY POLICY	Mobilizing cities towards a low carbon future: tambourines, carrots and sticks	Initially, the article debates approaches to evaluating the energy performance of a city. The paper discusses initiatives to promote regional action toward a low-carbon future.	Austria, Germany, The Netherlands and Sweden
(Exner et al., 2016)	[44]	ENERGY POLICY	Measuring regional resilience toward fossil fuel supply constraints. Adaptability and vulnerability in socio-ecological transformations—the case of Austria	The paper presents a model to ensure the level of resilience in a society.	Austria
(Flinkman et al., 2018)	[45]	BALTIC FOR.	Exploring the drivers of demand for non-industrial wood pellets for heating	This study presents the key drivers of non-industrial wood pellet consumption, considering the wood pellet markets for heating purposes.	Italy, Germany, France, Sweden, Austria, Finland, and Switzerland
(Heidrich et al., 2016)	[46]	J. ENVIRON. MANAGE.	National climate policies across Europe and their impacts on cities’ strategies	This study offers a comparative analysis of the transnational policy of 200 European cities.	200 European cities from Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom
(Kautto et al., 2012)	[47]	BIOMASS BIOENERG.	Interaction of the EU ETS and national climate policy instruments’ impact on biomass use	This study focuses on the impacts of climate policy instruments on biomass use.	Austria, Finland, Germany, The Netherlands, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom
(Rocha et al., 2016)	[48]	ENERGY	Energy-efficient building retrofits: an assessment of regulatory proposals under uncertainty	This article proposes a model to determine the best policy for investment in new technologies and the decommissioning of old equipment.	Austria and Spain
(Seebauer et al., 2019a)	[49]	ENERGY SOURCES ECON. PLANN. POLICY	Integrating climate and social housing policy to alleviate energy poverty: an analysis of targets and instruments in Austria	The article identifies the conditions under which social housing design in Austria may lead to reductions in carbon emissions and inequality.	Austria
(Soimakallio and Saikku, 2012)	[50]	ENERGY	CO₂ emissions attributed to annual average electricity consumption in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries	Life cycle assessment. Production-based and consumption-based CO₂ emission intensities of electricity for the OECD countries from 1990 to 2008.	OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries, such as Switzerland, Norway, Slovakia and Austria
(Steurer and Clar, 2015)	[38]	POLICY SCI.	Is decentralization always good for climate change mitigation? How federalism has complicated the greening of building policies in Austria	The study analyzes all major EU, federal and provincial policies that aimed to “green” the building sector since the signing of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.	Austria
(Steurer et al., 2020)	[51]	NAT. RESOUR. FORUM	Climate change mitigation in Austria and Switzerland: the pitfalls of federalism in greening decentralized building policies	The paper analyzes and compares how climate change mitigation in the building sector during the Kyoto Period is affected by federalism in Austria and Switzerland (1990–2012).	Austria and Switzerland
(Vihemäki et al., 2019)	[52]	WOOD MATER. SCI. ENG.	Institutional and policy frameworks shaping the wooden multi-story construction markets: a comparative case study on Austria and Finland	This paper aims to contribute to the knowledge of the market prospects of wooden multi-story construction (WMC) in two European countries through expert interviews.	Austria and Finland
(Zwickl-Bernhard and Auer, 2021)	[53]	APPL. ENERGY	Open-source modeling of a low-carbon urban neighborhood with high shares of local renewable generation	This study examines various cost-minimizing energy technology portfolio studies for an energy community in Vienna, Austria.	Vienna/Austria
(Bednar-Friedl et al., 2012)	[54]	EMPIRICA	The effectiveness of anti-leakage policies in the European Union: Results for Austria	This study explores the impacts of potential EU policies to counter losses in international competitiveness and carbon leakage from the perspective of Austria.	Austria
(Braschel et al., 2014)	[55]	WASTE MANAGE. RES.	Understanding the side effects of emission trading: implications for waste management	This study employed a form of methodological triangulation, including a literature review, followed by an empirical analysis.	Austria
(Ćetković and Hagemann, 2020)	[56]	ENERGY RES. SOC. SCI.	Changing climate for populists examining the influence of radical right political parties on low carbon energy transitions in western Europe	The article compares the climate policy performance in Austria, Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. The data for the analysis was based on official government documents.	Austria, Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden
(Hermann et al., 2015)	[57]	ENVIRON. POLICY GOV.	Cultural imprints on scientific policy advice: climate science policy interactions within Austrian neocorporatism	. The article investigates scientific publications on Austrian climate policy, neo-corporatism and science–policy interactions to provide advice on climate policy.	Austria
(Hermann et al., 2017a)	[58]	AUSTRIAN J POLIT. SCI.	Alerters, critics and objectivists: researchers in Austrian newspaper coverage of climate change	The article investigates the Austrian newspaper (Kronen Zeitung, Kleine Zeitung, Die Presse, and Der Standard) coverage of climate change.	Austria
(Hermann et al., 2017b)	[59]	J. ENVIRON. POL. PLAN.	Science–policy interactions in Austrian, Dutch, and Swiss climate policy: a comparative account	The article compares the climate science–policy arenas of three neo-corporatist countries, Austria, The Netherlands, and Switzerland.	Austrian, Dutch, and Swiss
(Kalt et al., 2016)	[60]	ENVIRON. SCI. POLICY	Carbon accounting of material substitution with biomass case studies for Austria investigated with IPCC default and alternative approaches	Two case studies are investigated to quantify the potential benefits of material substitution in terms of GHG mitigation: a) wood-based insulating boards produced from wood residues and b) bio-ethylene produced from lignocellulosic ethanol.	Austria
(Kirchner et al., 2019)	[61]	ENERGY POLICY	CO₂ taxes equity and the double dividend macroeconomic model simulations for Austria	Considering the Austrian context, the article investigates the impacts of CO₂ tax schemes on macroeconomic indicators, CO₂ emissions and equity.	Austria
(Nabernegg et al., 2019)	[62]	ECOL. ECON.	National policies for global emission reductions: effectiveness of carbon emission reductions in international supply chains	This paper evaluates responses to national climate policies on consumption-based emissions along the global supply chain and compares them to the effects on production-based emissions.	Austria
(Nash and Steurer, 2019)	[63]	CLIM. POLICY	Taking stock of climate change acts in Europe: living policy processes or symbolic gestures	This study analyzes seven European CCAs with regard to GHG emission reduction targets, planning/implementation mechanisms, and feedback/evaluations prescribed by the legislation.	UK, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Norway
(Niedertscheider et al., 2017)	[64]	ECOSYSTEMS	Influence of land-use intensification on vegetation C-stocks in an Alpine Valley from 1865 to 2003	This study applies the analytical framework of the human appropriation of net primary production as a tool to quantify and operationalize land-use intensity changes.	Austria
(Niedertscheider et al., 2018)	[65]	ENVIRON. SCI. POLICY	Austrian climate policies and GHG emissions since 1990: what is the role of climate policy integration?	Conceptual framework to evaluate the level of climate policy integration.	Austria
(Schaffrin et al., 2014)	[66]	ENVIRON. POLIT.	The innovativeness of national policy portfolios: climate policy change in Austria Germany and the UK	Considering the climate policy context in the period between 1998 and 2010, this study performed an empirical analysis of national policy portfolios for Austria, Germany, and the UK, for the period 1998–2010.	Austria, Germany, and the UK
(Schaffrin et al., 2015)	[67]	POLICY STUD. J.	Toward a comparative measure of climate policy output	This research compiled data from 1998 to 2010 by carrying out a content-based analysis of national policy output in the energy-supply sector in Austria, Germany, and the United Kingdom.	Austria, Germany, and the United Kingdom
(Steininger et al., 2018)	[15]	GLOBAL ENVIRON. CHANGE	Austria’s consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions: identifying sectoral sources and destinations	The article analyzes the sectoral structure of national consumption-based emission in Austria.	Austria
(Steurer and Clar, 2018)	[68]	J. ENVIRON. POL. PLAN.	The ambiguity of federalism in climate policymaking: how the political system in Austria hinders mitigation and facilitates adaptation	This study analyzes the role played by federalism in Austria in greening the decentralized building sector and in improving regional flood risk management.	Austria
(Tobin, 2017)	[69]	GLOB. ENVIRON. POLIT.	Leaders and laggards: Climate policy ambition in developed states	This article employs a climate policy variation among the Annex II-developed states.	Several countries are analyzed, but Austria is a study case.
(Alexeeva-Talebi, 2011)	[70]	ENERGY ECON.	Cost pass-through of the EU emissions allowances examining the European petroleum markets	This article finds the influence of prices for European Union Allowances (EUAs) on unleaded petrol retail prices from 2005 to 2007.	Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden
(Arto et al., 2009)	[71]	ENERGY POLICY	Accounting for early action in the European Union emission trading scheme	This study makes an index decomposition analysis (IDA) to quantify early action (EA).	Austria, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom and EU-15
(Cai and Menegaki, 2019)	[72]	ENVIRON. SCI. POLLUT. RES.	Convergence of clean energy consumption-panel unit root test with sharp and smooth breaks	This article analyzes the convergence of clean energy consumption, using s a newly proposed panel unit-root test with sharp and smooth breaks.	21 OECD countries and 14 emerging market countries
(Darby et al., 2013)	[73]	ENERGY EFFIC.	Potential carbon impacts of smart grid development in six European countries	This study examines reports on work carried out for the European Commission to devise a methodology for estimating the potential impact of smart grids on carbon emissions.	Austria, France, Germany, Great Britain, Portugal and Spain
(Davis and Caldeira, 2010)	[74]	PROC. NATL. ACAD. SCI. U. S. A.	Consumption-based accounting of CO₂ emissions	The article presents a global consumption-based CO₂ emissions inventory and calculations of associated consumption-based energy and carbon intensities.	113 countries/regions
(Feichtinger and Pregernig, 2016)	[75]	ENVIRON. POLICY GOV.	Beyond mandated participation: dealing with hydropower in the context of the water framework directive	An analytical framework is developed in the highly contested arena of hydropower in Austria and Bavaria.	Austria and Bavaria
(García et al., 2020)	[76]	ORGAN. ENVIRON.	The Impact of EU Allowance Prices on the Stock Market Indices of the European Power Industries: Evidence From the Ongoing EU ETS Phase III	This research investigates the long-term impact of EU carbon dioxide emission allowances on the European power sector.	Austria, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and Spain
(Höltinger et al., 2016)	[77]	ENERGY POLICY	Austria’s wind energy potential—A participatory modeling approach to assess sociopolitical and market acceptance	Analysis of wind power potential using the social acceptance concept, as proposed by Wüstenhagen et al. (2007).	Austria
(Köfinger et al., 2018)	[78]	ENERGY	Simulation-based evaluation of large-scale waste heat utilization in urban district heating networks: Optimized integration and operation of a seasonal storage	This article describes the simulation and evaluation of different scenarios for waste heat integration in the Linz DH network.	Linz
(Komendantova et al., 2018)	[79]	ENERGY RES. SOC. SCI.	Of transitions and models community engagement democracy and empowerment in the Austrian energy transition	This article uses the case-study method and in-depth stakeholder interviews.	Austria
(Maeder et al., 2021)	[80]	APPL. ENERGY	Assessing the need for flexibility technologies in decarbonized power systems: a new model applied to Central Europe	The article proposes a power system optimization model to determine the cost-efficient deployment of renewable electricity generation technologies and flexibility technologies.	Central Europe (Switzerland, Austria, France, Germany, and Italy)
(Qu et al., 2018)	[81]	ENVIRON. SCI. TECHNOL.	Virtual CO₂ emission flows in the global electricity trade network	This article employs a network approach to account for the flows in the whole electricity trade network to estimate CO₂ emissions of electricity consumption for 137 major countries/regions in 2014.	Several countries
(Scordato, 2010)	[82]	J. KNOWL. ECON.	Public Energy R&D Priorities in Small EU Member States: Evidence from Denmark, Austria and The Netherlands	This study investigates energy R&D specialization in Denmark, Austria and The Netherlands.	Denmark, Austria and The Netherlands
(Wohlgemuth, 1999)	[83]	RENEW. ENERGY	Cost-benefit indicators associated with the integration of alternative energy sources: a systems approach for Carinthia, Austria	This study analyzes and projects to 2020 the technical and market penetration potential of AES in the context of the Carinthian energy system.	Austria
(Breuss and Steininger, 1998)	[84]	J. POLICY MODEL.	Biomass energy use to reduce climate change: a general equilibrium analysis for Austria	General equilibrium framework of the Austrian economy for different supply scenarios.	Austria
(Essl and Mauerhofer, 2018)	[85]	J. CLEAN PROD.	Opportunities for the mutual implementation of nature conservation and climate change policies: a multilevel case study based on local stakeholder perceptions	The article explores the stakeholder’s perceptions of EU policies on a regional level.	Vienna/Austria
(Gaube et al., 2009)	[86]	LANDSC. ECOL.	Combining agent-based and stock-flow modeling approaches in a participative analysis of the integrated land system in Reichraming, Austria	The article proposes an integrated socio-ecological model and applied it to the municipality of Reichraming in Upper Austria.	Reichraming (Austria)
(Haberl et al., 2003)	[87]	LAND USE POLICY	Land-use change and socio-economic metabolism in Austria—Part II: land-use scenarios for 2020	The study evaluates the relations between land use and socio-economic metabolism, particularly socio-economic biomass flows.	Austria
(Hall, 1997)	[41]	FOR. ECOL. MANAGE.	Biomass energy in industrialized countries: a view of the future	Case studies are presented for several developed countries and the constraints involved in modernizing biomass energy, along with the potential for turning them into entrepreneurial opportunities.	Europe (Finland, Sweden, Austria, and Denmark) and the USA
(Schirpke et al., 2013)	[88]	INT. J.BIODIVERSITY SCI. ECOSYST. SERV. MANAGE.	Multiple ecosystem services of a changing Alpine landscape: past, present and future	Modeling future land-use patterns, the study examined the relationship between agricultural activities and multiple ecosystem services on a landscape scale, from past to future.	Austrian Alpes
(Schmidt et al., 2011)	[89]	ENERGY POLICY	Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria	A mixed integer program (MIP) is developed and applied to assess the cost-effectiveness of different policy instruments in attaining the policy targets of reducing GHG emissions and substituting fossil fuels in Austria.	Austria
(Scholz et al., 2021)	[90]	NAT. RESOUR. MODEL.	Simulating the forest fuel market as a socio-ecological system with spatial agent-based methods: a case study in Carinthia, Austria	An agent-based modeling and simulation approach to model the forest fuel supply chain for heating purposes.	Austria
(Theurl et al., 2017)	[91]	J. CLEAN. PROD.	Unheated soil-grown winter vegetables in Austria: greenhouse gas emissions and socioeconomic factors of diffusion potential	This article analyzes the GHG emissions along vegetable supply chains based on a life cycle approach and investigates factors of the socioeconomic system.	Austria
(Winkler and Winiwarter, 2015)	[92]	J. INTEGR. ENVIRON. SCI.	Scenarios of livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions in Austria	The article provides insights into national Austrian livestock emissions. This entails the use of GHG emission trends until 2030. In addition, global emission data were extracted from the representative concentration pathways (RCPs) database for the years 2000–2100.	Austria
(Winkler and Winiwarter, 2016)	[93]	MITIGATION ADAPT. STRATEG. GLOBAL CHANGE	Greenhouse gas scenarios for Austria: a comparison of different approaches to emission trends	To begin, specific emissions data for Austria was gathered from Umweltbundesamt and European Union reports. Secondly, grid data for eight different substances and 12 different industrial sectors were downloaded from the RCP database. In a third step, all grid cells having a majority of their area within Austria were selected. Finally, graphical representations of emission projections across the various scenario levels were compared for Austria according to GHG species (CO₂, CH₄, and N₂O) and the industrial sector.	Austria
(Gass et al., 2014)	[94]	RENEW. ENERGY	Analysis of alternative policy instruments to promote electric vehicles in Austria	The article analyzes different policy instruments to support the introduction of electric vehicles in Austria.	Austria
(Kapeller et al., 2019)	[95]	SUSTAINABILITY	Holiday travel behavior and correlated CO₂ emissions: modeling trends and future scenarios for Austrian tourists	This study estimates past and future emission trends of land and air travel for domestic and international travel destinations. For this, the article uses a combination of two software models, a social-economic model and an emission calculation model.	Austria
(Meyer and Wessely, 2009)	[96]	ENERGY POLICY	Fuel efficiency of the Austrian passenger vehicle fleet: analysis of trends in the technological profile and related impacts on CO₂ emissions	. The study delineates shifts in demand patterns in the profile of the Austrian passenger car fleet from 1990 to 2007.	Austria
(Rauch and Gronalt, 2011)	[97]	BIOMASS BIOENERGY	The effects of rising energy costs and transportation mode mix on forest fuel procurement costs	This paper presents a mixed integer linear programming model to design a forest fuel supply network for Austria.	Austria
(Seebauer et al., 2019b)	[98]	ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY SOC.	Promoting adoption while avoiding rebound: integrating disciplinary perspectives on market diffusion and carbon impacts of electric cars and building renovations in Austria	This study integrates results from the fuzzy cognitive mapping of expert knowledge, from a household survey on adoption and use from the macroeconomic modeling of energy efficiency policies.	Austria
(Smetschka et al., 2019)	[99]	ECOL. ECON.	Time Matters: The Carbon Footprint of Everyday Activities in Austria	This study investigated the carbon footprints of everyday activities in Austria.	Austria

Table 3

Additional studies examined energy policy and sustainability issues in the Austrian economy.

Authors	References	Source	Title	Objective/Method	Countries Included
(Schinko et al., 2014)	[5]	Energy Policy	Switching to carbon-free production processes: Implications for carbon leakage and border carbon adjustment	This paper investigated whether a policy fostering the switch to carbon-free technologies can substitute for border carbon adjustment (BCA)	EU-27 plus EFTA, USA, Russian, Other Annex 1, China,, India, Energy exporting countries (excluding Mexico), Other middle-income countries,Other low-income countries
(Goers and Schneider, 2019)	[9]	Modern Economy	Austria’s Path to a Climate-Friendly Societyand Economy—Contributions of an Environmental Tax Reform	This study explores an environmental tax reform for Austria.	Austria
(IEA, 2020)	[18]	IEA Publication	Austria 2020—Energy Policy Review	The IEA report assesses the key energy challenges in Austria’s energy markets by evaluating the main national energy insights, energy security and energy system transformation.	Austria
(Baiardi and Morana, 2021)	[100]	Energy Economics	Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union	The article uses Eurobarometer surveys on climate change to assess public attitudes on climate change in Europe over the last decade.	Europe
(Krenek, 2020)	[101]	Österreichische Gesellschaft für Europapolitik	How to implement a WTO-compatible full border carbon adjustment as an important part of the European Green Deal	This study brings policy recommendations to European carbon adjustment.	Europe
(Republic of Austria, 2020)	[102]	Government Programme 2020–2024	Out of a Sense of Responsibility for Austria.	Government Program 2020–2024	Austria
(FAS, 2020)	[103]	Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagzeitung	Sebastian Kurz im Interview “Eine Schuldenunion wird es mit uns nicht geben”	Interview with Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz	Europe
(Landis and Heindl, 2016)	[104]	The Energy Journal	Renewable Energy Targets in the Context of the EU ETS: Whom do They Benefit Exactly?	In this article, ageneral equilibrium model is employed to investigate the distributive effects of European climate policy across households at the member state and income quintile level.	Europe
(EAA, 2017)	[105]	Umweltbundesamt GmbH	Klimaschutzbericht 2017	The study from the Environment Agency in Austria presents the GHG emissions in Austria and discusses the climate policy targets by sector aiming at achieving the national NDC targets by simulating several emissions scenarios (2030 and 2050).	Austria
(EEA, 2019)	[106]	European Environment Agency (EEA)	Greenhouse gas emissions under the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD)	The Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) No. 406/2009/EC establishes annual GHG targets for the Member States for the period 2013–2020, regarding sectors not included in the EU ETS	Europe
(UBA, 2019)	[107]	Umweltbundesamt GmbH	GHG Projections and Assessment of Policies and Measures in Austria	The study from the Environment Agency Austria presents the national GHG emission projections for 2020, 2025, 2030 and 2035, based on scenarios developed from available information from the Federal Ministry of Sustainability and Tourism, the Austrian Institute of Economic Research (WIFO), the University of Technology from Vienna, the Austrian Energy Agency (AEA) and the UNFCCC.	Austria
(Kratena et al., 2014)	[108]	WIFO—Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung	Alternative Szenarien zur Entwicklung des Energieverbrauchs in Österreich	This study developed different energy use scenarios for the Austrian economy, up to 2020 and further to 2030.	Austria
(Großmann and Stocker, 2019)	[109]	Final report	Evaluation von Klimaschutzmaßnahmen mit dem Modell e3.at meetPASS: meeting the Paris Agreement and Supporting Sustainability Working Paper No. 5	This article brings an evaluation of climate protection measures using the e3.at model meetPASS. In this working paper, the e3.at model is first briefly described, which is used to calculate both the e3.at baseline projection and the meetPASS scenario, with the probable expected impacts for Austria in the areas of the economy, the environment and to quantify the social aspects.	Austria
(Großmann et al., 2014)	[110]	Final report	Wissenschaftliche Studie Zur Modellierung Und Simulierung Einer Ökosozialen Steuerstrukturreform in Österreich. Studie Im Auftrag Des Ökosozialen. In Proceedings of the Forums Österreich, Julius Raab Stiftung, Energie Steiermark AG, Gewerkschaft PRO-GE, Senat der Wirtschaft Öst. Greenpeace, Schachinger Logistik, Global 2000.; Endbericht, Osnabrück., 2014.	Scientific study on the modeling and simulation of eco-social tax structure reform in Austria.	Austria
(Wolter et al., 2011)	[111]	Working Paper Nr. 4 des Projekts KONSENS:	Auswirkungen von energiepolitischen Maßnahmen auf Wirtscha?, Energiesystem und private Haushalte	The results of the modeling of measures are described in this working paper. The focus is on showing the distribution effects, but the effects on the economy, environment and energy system are also discussed.	Austria
(Kirchner et al., 2017)	[112]	2017 International Energy Workshop College	Distributional Impacts of a CO₂ Fuel Tax on Different Household Income Quintiles in Austria 2017 International Energy Workshop Distributional Impacts of a CO₂ Fuel Tax on Different Household Income Quintiles in Austria. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Energy Workshop College; College Park, Maryland, 2017.	This study aims to investigate the distributional, economic, and environmental impacts of different types of CO₂ taxes and tax rebate schemes, with a focus on petrol and diesel consumption for mobility demand among different household income quintiles in Austria.	Austria
(Kletzan et al., 2008)	[113]	WIFO—Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung	Ziele und Optionen der Steuerreform: Optionen für eine Ökologisierung des österreichischen Steuersystems	Based on the actual revenue from eco-taxes in Austria, the study evaluates the economic effects of an additional revenue from environmental taxes of EUR 1 billion, which is redistributed to the economy and private households via a reduction in non-wage labor costs.	Austria
(Großmann et al., 2020)	[114]	(ExpertInnenbericht). GWS,	Die Auswirkungen von Klimapolitischen Maßnahmen Auf Den Österreichischen Arbeitsmarkt	The present study examines the effects of climate protection measures on CO₂ emissions and the labor market using model-based impact assessments.	Austria
(Stocker et al., 2011)	[115]	Projekt KONSENS: KonsumentInnen und Energiesparmaßnahmen	Verteilungseffekte und Reformoptionen ausgewählter energiepolitischer Maßnahmen	The KONSENS project compares three possible energy policy measures with regard to their effects on the income situation of different household types	Austria
(Breuss and Steininger, 1995)	[116]	IEF Working Paper Nr. 7	Reducing the greenhouse effect in Austria. A general equilibrium evaluation of CO₂-policy options	In this study, an energy-focused computable general equilibrium (CGE) model for the Austrian economy is constructed	Austria
(Thaller et al., 2021)	[19]	Transportation Research Part D	How to design policy packages for sustainable transport: Balancing disruptiveness and implementability	This paper aims to identify policies that could potentially contribute to disruptive policy packages required to drastically reduce passenger transport emissions.	Austria

References

1. WEF. World Economic Forum; WEF: Cologny, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 1-97.

2. Karlsson, M.; Alfredsson, E.; Westling, N. Climate Policy Co-Benefits: A Review. Clim. Policy; 2020; 20, pp. 292-316. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1724070]

3. Ji, C.J.; Li, X.Y.; Hu, Y.J.; Wang, X.Y.; Tang, B.J. Research on Carbon Price in Emissions Trading Scheme: A Bibliometric Analysis. Nat. Hazards; 2019; 99, pp. 1381-1396. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3433-6]

4. Bachner, G.; Mayer, J.; Steininger, K.W.; Anger-Kraavi, A.; Smith, A.; Barker, T.S. Uncertainties in Macroeconomic Assessments of Low-Carbon Transition Pathways—The Case of the European Iron and Steel Industry. Ecol. Econ.; 2020; 172, 106631. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106631]

5. Schinko, T.; Bednar-Friedl, B.; Steininger, K.W.; Grossmann, W.D. Switching to Carbon-Free Production Processes: Implications for Carbon Leakage and Border Carbon Adjustment. Energy Policy; 2014; 67, pp. 818-831. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.077]

6. World Bank Group. State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2020; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2020.

7. Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition. CPLC High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices (Report); Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition: Washington, DC, USA, 2019.

8. Santos, L.; Lucena, A.; Garaffa, R. Would Different Methodologies for Assessing Carbon Leakage Exposure Lead to Different Risk Levels? A Case Study of the Brazilian Industry. Clim. Policy; 2019; 19, pp. 1102-1116. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1627180]

9. Goers, S.; Schneider, F. Austria’s Path to a Climate-Friendly Society and Economy—Contributions of an Environmental Tax Reform. Mod. Econ.; 2019; 10, pp. 1369-1384. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4236/me.2019.105092]

10. Sommer, M.; Kratena, K. Consumption and Production-Based CO₂ Pricing Policies: Macroeconomic Trade-Offs and Carbon Leakage. Econ. Syst. Res.; 2020; 32, pp. 29-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09535314.2019.1612736]

11. Steininger, K.; Lininger, C.; Droege, S.; Roser, D.; Tomlinson, L.; Meyer, L. Justice and Cost Effectiveness of Consumption-Based versus Production-Based Approaches in the Case of Unilateral Climate Policies. Glob. Environ. Change; 2014; 24, pp. 75-87. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.10.005]

12. European Commission. State of the Union: Commission Raises Climate Ambition and Proposes 55% Cut in Emissions by 2030 (Press Release IP/20/1599); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2020.

13. Dupont, C.; Oberthür, S.; von Homeyer, I. The Covid-19 Crisis: A Critical Juncture for EU Climate Policy Development?. J. Eur. Integr.; 2020; 42, pp. 1095-1110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2020.1853117]

14. Bachner, G.; Bednar-Friedl, B. The Effects of Climate Change Impacts on Public Budgets and Implications of Fiscal Counterbalancing Instruments. Environ. Model. Assess.; 2019; 24, pp. 121-142. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10666-018-9617-3]

15. Steininger, K.W.; Munoz, P.; Karstensen, J.; Peters, G.P.; Strohmaier, R.; Velázquez, E. Austria’s Consumption-Based Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Identifying Sectoral Sources and Destinations. Glob. Environ. Change; 2018; 48, pp. 226-242. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.011]

16. Steininger, K.W.; Bednar-Friedl, B.; Formayer, H.; König, M. Consistent Economic Cross-Sectoral Climate Change Impact Scenario Analysis: Method and Application to Austria. Clim. Serv.; 2016; 1, pp. 39-52. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2016.02.003]

17. Kettner, C.; Kletzan-Slamanig, D. Climate Policy Integration on the National and Regional Level: A Case Study for Austria and Styria. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy; 2018; 8, pp. 259-269.

18. IEA. Energy Policy Review; IEA: Paris, France, 2020.

19. Environmental Agency Austria. Austria’s Annual Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990–2020. Submission under Regulation (EU) No 525/2013. REPORT REP-0798; Environmental Agency Austria: Vienna, Austria, 2022.

20. Stocker, A.; Großmann, A.; Madlener, R.; Wolter, M.I. Sustainable Energy Development in Austria until 2020: Insights from Applying the Integrated Model “E3.At.”. Energy Policy; 2011; 39, pp. 6082-6099. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.009] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21976785]

21. Georgi, C.; Darkow, I.L.; Kotzab, H. Foundations of Logistics and Supply Chain Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Four International Journals. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl.; 2013; 16, pp. 522-533. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2013.846309]

22. Zhang, J.; Yu, Q.; Zheng, F.; Long, C.; Lu, Z.; Duan, Z. Comparing Keywords Plus of WOS and Author Keywords: A Case Study of Patient Adherence Research. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol.; 2016; 67, pp. 967-972. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23437]

23. Corsini, F.; Certomà, C.; Dyer, M.; Frey, M. Participatory Energy: Research, Imaginaries and Practices on People’ Contribute to Energy Systems in the Smart City. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change; 2019; 142, pp. 322-332. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.028]

24. Wang, B.; Pan, S.Y.; Ke, R.Y.; Wang, K.; Wei, Y.M. An Overview of Climate Change Vulnerability: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on Web of Science Database. Nat. Hazards; 2014; 74, pp. 1649-1666. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1260-y]

25. Haunschild, R.; Bornmann, L.; Marx, W. Climate Change Research in View of Bibliometrics. PLoS ONE; 2016; 11, e0160393. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160393]

26. Wang, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, B. A Bibliometric Analysis of Climate Change Adaptation Based on Massive Research Literature Data. J. Clean. Prod.; 2018; 199, pp. 1072-1082. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.183]

27. Hou, Y.; Wang, Q. A Bibliometric Study about Energy, Environment, and Climate Change. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.; 2021; 28, pp. 34187-34199. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14059-2] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33974203]

28. Li, L.; Sun, W.; Hu, W.; Sun, Y. Impact of Natural and Social Environmental Factors on Building Energy Consumption: Based on Bibliometrics. J. Build. Eng.; 2021; 37, 102136. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.102136]

29. Cordeiro, M.C.; Santos, L.; Angelo, A.C.M.; Marujo, L.G. Research Directions for Supply Chain Management in Facing Pandemics: An Assessment Based on Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl.; 2021; pp. 1-21. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2021.1902487]

30. Belter, C.W.; Seidel, D.J. A Bibliometric Analysis of Climate Engineering Research. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change; 2013; 4, pp. 417-427. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.229]

31. Wang, C.; Lim, M.K.; Lyons, A. Twenty Years of the International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications: A Bibliometric Overview. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl.; 2019; 22, pp. 304-323. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2018.1526262]

32. Camarasa, C.; Nägeli, C.; Ostermeyer, Y.; Klippel, M.; Botzler, S. Diffusion of Energy Efficiency Technologies in European Residential Buildings: A Bibliometric Analysis. Energy Build.; 2019; 202, 109339. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109339]

33. Durach, C.F.; Kembro, J.; Wieland, A. A New Paradigm for Systematic Literature Reviews in Supply Chain Management. J. Supply Chain Manag.; 2017; 53, pp. 67-85. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12145]

34. Aria, M.; Cuccurullo, C. Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis. J. Informetr.; 2017; 11, pp. 959-975. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007]

35. Secinaro, S.; Brescia, V.; Calandra, D.; Biancone, P. Employing Bibliometric Analysis to Identify Suitable Business Models for Electric Cars. J. Clean. Prod.; 2020; 264, 121503. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121503]

36. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Altman, D.; Antes, G.; Atkins, D.; Barbour, V.; Barrowman, N.; Berlin, J.A. et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med.; 2009; 6, e1000097. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097]

37. Hosseini, S.; Ivanov, D.; Dolgui, A. Review of Quantitative Methods for Supply Chain Resilience Analysis. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev.; 2019; 125, pp. 285-307. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.001]

38. Steurer, R.; Clar, C. Is Decentralisation Always Good for Climate Change Mitigation? How Federalism Has Complicated the Greening of Building Policies in Austria. Policy Sci.; 2015; 48, pp. 85-107. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9206-5]

39. Schmid, E.R.; Fogy, I.; Kenndler, E. Beitrag Zur Unterscheidung von Gärungsessig Und Synthetischem Säureessig Durch Die Bestimmung Der Spezifischen14C-Radioaktivität. Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch.; 1977; 163, pp. 121-122. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01126032] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/857491]

40. Stenberg, R. Carbon Fibre Composite on the Viggen Aircraft. Compos. Struct.; 1988; 10, pp. 75-81. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0263-8223(88)90061-X]

41. Hall, D.O. Biomass Energy in Industrialised Countries—A View of the Future. For. Ecol. Manag.; 1997; 91, pp. 17-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(96)03883-2]

42. Abart-Heriszt, L.; Erker, S.; Stoeglehner, G. The Energy Mosaic Austria—A Nationwide Energy and Greenhouse Gas Inventory on Municipal Level as Action Field of Integrated Spatial and Energy Planning. Energies; 2019; 12, 3065. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en12163065]

43. Azevedo, I.; Delarue, E.; Meeus, L. Mobilizing Cities towards a Low-Carbon Future: Tambourines, Carrots and Sticks. Energy Policy; 2013; 61, pp. 894-900. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.06.065]

44. Exner, A.; Politti, E.; Schriefl, E.; Erker, S.; Stangl, R.; Baud, S.; Warmuth, H.; Matzenberger, J.; Kranzl, L.; Paulesich, R. et al. Measuring Regional Resilience towards Fossil Fuel Supply Constraints. Adaptability and Vulnerability in Socio-Ecological Transformations-the Case of Austria. Energy Policy; 2016; 91, pp. 128-137. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.12.031]

45. Flinkman, M.; Sikkema, R.; Spelter, H.; Jonsson, R. Exploring the Drivers of Demand for Non-Industrial Wood Pellets for Heating. Balt. For.; 2018; 24, pp. 86-98.

46. Heidrich, O.; Reckien, D.; Olazabal, M.; Foley, A.; Salvia, M.; de Gregorio Hurtado, S.; Orru, H.; Flacke, J.; Geneletti, D.; Pietrapertosa, F. et al. National Climate Policies across Europe and Their Impacts on Cities Strategies. J. Environ. Manag.; 2016; 168, pp. 36-45. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.11.043]

47. Kautto, N.; Arasto, A.; Sijm, J.; Peck, P. Interaction of the EU ETS and National Climate Policy Instruments—Impact on Biomass Use. Biomass Bioenergy; 2012; 38, pp. 117-127. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.002]

48. Rocha, P.; Kaut, M.; Siddiqui, A.S. Energy-Efficient Building Retrofits: An Assessment of Regulatory Proposals under Uncertainty. Energy; 2016; 101, pp. 278-287. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.01.037]

49. Seebauer, S.; Friesenecker, M.; Eisfeld, K. Integrating Climate and Social Housing Policy to Alleviate Energy Poverty: An Analysis of Targets and Instruments in Austria. Energy Sources Part B Econ. Plan. Policy; 2019; 14, pp. 304-326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2019.1693665]

50. Soimakallio, S.; Saikku, L. CO₂ Emissions Attributed to Annual Average Electricity Consumption in OECD (the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development) Countries. Energy; 2012; 38, pp. 13-20. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.12.048]

51. Steurer, R.; Clar, C.; Casado-Asensio, J. Climate Change Mitigation in Austria and Switzerland: The Pitfalls of Federalism in Greening Decentralized Building Policies. Nat. Resour. Forum; 2020; 44, pp. 89-108. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12166]

52. Vihemäki, H.; Ludvig, A.; Toivonen, R.; Toppinen, A.; Weiss, G. Institutional and Policy Frameworks Shaping the Wooden Multi-Storey Construction Markets: A Comparative Case Study on Austria and Finland. Wood Mater. Sci. Eng.; 2019; 14, pp. 312-324. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17480272.2019.1641741]

53. Zwickl-Bernhard, S.; Auer, H. Open-Source Modeling of a Low-Carbon Urban Neighborhood with High Shares of Local Renewable Generation. Appl. Energy; 2021; 282, 116166. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116166]

54. Bednar-Friedl, B.; Kulmer, V.; Schinko, T. The Effectiveness of Anti-Leakage Policies in the European Union: Results for Austria. Empirica; 2012; 39, pp. 233-260. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10663-012-9186-7]

55. Braschel, N.; Posch, A.; Pierer, M. Understanding the Side Effects of Emission Trading: Implications for Waste Management. Waste Manag. Res.; 2014; 32, pp. 34-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734242X13513828]

56. Ćetković, S.; Hagemann, C. Changing Climate for Populists? Examining the Influence of Radical-Right Political Parties on Low-Carbon Energy Transitions in Western Europe. Energy Res. Soc. Sci.; 2020; 66, 101571. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101571]

57. Hermann, A.T.; Pregernig, M.; Hogl, K.; Bauer, A. Cultural Imprints on Scientific Policy Advice: Climate Science-Policy Interactions within Austrian Neo-Corporatism. Environ. Policy Gov.; 2015; 25, pp. 343-355. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.1674]

58. Hermann, A.T.; Pikl, M.; Bauer, A. Alerters, Critics, and Objectivists: Researchers in Austrian Newspaper Coverage of Climate Change. Austrian J. Polit. Sci.; 2017; 46, pp. 13-25. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15203/ozp.2388.vol46iss4]

59. Hermann, A.T.; Hogl, K.; Pregernig, M. Science–Policy Interactions in Austrian, Dutch, and Swiss Climate Policy: A Comparative Account. J. Environ. Policy Plan.; 2017; 19, pp. 168-182. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1180238]

60. Kalt, G.; Höher, M.; Lauk, C.; Schipfer, F.; Kranzl, L. Carbon Accounting of Material Substitution with Biomass: Case Studies for Austria Investigated with IPCC Default and Alternative Approaches. Environ. Sci. Policy; 2016; 64, pp. 155-163. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.022]

61. Kirchner, M.; Sommer, M.; Kratena, K.; Kletzan-Slamanig, D.; Kettner-Marx, C. CO₂ Taxes, Equity and the Double Dividend—Macroeconomic Model Simulations for Austria. Energy Policy; 2019; 126, pp. 295-314. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.030]

62. Nabernegg, S.; Bednar-Friedl, B.; Muñoz, P.; Titz, M.; Vogel, J. National Policies for Global Emission Reductions: Effectiveness of Carbon Emission Reductions in International Supply Chains. Ecol. Econ.; 2019; 158, pp. 146-157. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.12.006]

63. Nash, S.L.; Steurer, R. Taking Stock of Climate Change Acts in Europe: Living Policy Processes or Symbolic Gestures?. Clim. Policy; 2019; 19, pp. 1052-1065. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1623164]

64. Niedertscheider, M.; Tasser, E.; Patek, M.; Rüdisser, J.; Tappeiner, U.; Erb, K.H. Influence of Land-Use Intensification on Vegetation C-Stocks in an Alpine Valley from 1865 to 2003. Ecosystems; 2017; 20, pp. 1391-1406. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10021-017-0120-5]

65. Niedertscheider, M.; Haas, W.; Görg, C. Austrian Climate Policies and GHG-Emissions since 1990: What Is the Role of Climate Policy Integration?. Environ. Sci. Policy; 2018; 81, pp. 10-17. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.12.007]

66. Schaffrin, A.; Sewerin, S.; Seubert, S. The Innovativeness of National Policy Portfolios—Climate Policy Change in Austria, Germany, and the UK. Environ. Polit.; 2014; 23, pp. 860-883. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2014.924206]

67. Schaffrin, A.; Sewerin, S.; Seubert, S. Toward a Comparative Measure of Climate Policy Output. Policy Stud. J.; 2015; 43, pp. 257-282. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psj.12095]

68. Steurer, R.; Clar, C. The Ambiguity of Federalism in Climate Policy-Making: How the Political System in Austria Hinders Mitigation and Facilitates Adaptation. J. Environ. Policy Plan.; 2018; 20, pp. 252-265. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2017.1411253]

69. Tobin, P. Leaders and Laggards: Climate Policy Ambition in Developed States. Glob. Environ. Polit.; 2017; 13, pp. 28-47. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00433]

70. Alexeeva-Talebi, V. Cost Pass-through of the EU Emissions Allowances: Examining the European Petroleum Markets. Energy Econ.; 2011; 33, pp. S75-S83. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.07.029]

71. Arto, I.; Gallastegui, C.; Ansuategi, A. Accounting for Early Action in the European Union Emission Trading Scheme. Energy Policy; 2009; 37, pp. 3914-3924. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.05.017]

72. Cai, Y.; Menegaki, A.N. Convergence of Clean Energy Consumption—Panel Unit Root Test with Sharp and Smooth Breaks. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.; 2019; 26, pp. 18790-18803. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04911-x]

73. Darby, S.; Strömbäck, J.; Wilks, M. Potential Carbon Impacts of Smart Grid Development in Six European Countries. Energy Effic.; 2013; 6, pp. 725-739. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12053-013-9208-8]

74. Davis, S.J.; Caldeira, K. Consumption-Based Accounting of CO₂ Emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA; 2010; 107, pp. 5687-5692. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906974107]

75. Feichtinger, J.; Pregernig, M. Beyond Mandated Participation: Dealing with Hydropower in the Context of the Water Framework Directive. Environ. Policy Gov.; 2016; 26, pp. 351-365. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.1699]

76. García, A.; García-Álvarez, M.T.; Moreno, B. The Impact of EU Allowance Prices on the Stock Market Indices of the European Power Industries: Evidence From the Ongoing EU ETS Phase III. Organ. Environ.; 2020; 34, 108602662092482. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1086026620924820]

77. Höltinger, S.; Salak, B.; Schauppenlehner, T.; Scherhaufer, P.; Schmidt, J. Austria’s Wind Energy Potential—A Participatory Modeling Approach to Assess Socio-Political and Market Acceptance. Energy Policy; 2016; 98, pp. 49-61. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.08.010]

78. Köfinger, M.; Schmidt, R.R.; Basciotti, D.; Terreros, O.; Baldvinsson, I.; Mayrhofer, J.; Moser, S.; Tichler, R.; Pauli, H. Simulation Based Evaluation of Large Scale Waste Heat Utilization in Urban District Heating Networks: Optimized Integration and Operation of a Seasonal Storage. Energy; 2018; 159, pp. 1161-1174. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.192]

79. Komendantova, N.; Riegler, M.; Neumueller, S. Of Transitions and Models: Community Engagement, Democracy, and Empowerment in the Austrian Energy Transition. Energy Res. Soc. Sci.; 2018; 39, pp. 141-151. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.031]

80. Maeder, M.; Weiss, O.; Boulouchos, K. Assessing the Need for Flexibility Technologies in Decarbonized Power Systems: A New Model Applied to Central Europe. Appl. Energy; 2021; 282, 116050. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116050]

81. Qu, S.; Li, Y.; Liang, S.; Yuan, J.; Xu, M. Virtual CO₂ Emission Flows in the Global Electricity Trade Network. Environ. Sci. Technol.; 2018; 52, pp. 6666-6675. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b05191] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29738231]

82. Scordato, L. Public Energy R&D Priorities in Small EU Member States: Evidence from Denmark, Austria and The Netherlands. J. Knowl. Econ.; 2010; 1, pp. 202-218. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13132-010-0014-7]

83. Wohlgemuth, N. Cost Benefit Indicators Associated with the Integration of Alternative Energy Sources a Systems Approach for Carinthia Austria. Renew. Energy; 1999; 16, pp. 1147-1150. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(98)00446-7]

84. Breuss, F.; Steininger, K. Biomass Energy Use to Reduce Climate Change: A General Equilibrium Analysis for Austria. J. Policy Model.; 1998; 20, pp. 513-535. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0161-8938(97)00073-2]

85. Essl, I.; Mauerhofer, V. Opportunities for Mutual Implementation of Nature Conservation and Climate Change Policies: A Multilevel Case Study Based on Local Stakeholder Perceptions. J. Clean. Prod.; 2018; 183, pp. 898-907. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.210]

86. Gaube, V.; Kaiser, C.; Wildenberg, M.; Adensam, H.; Fleissner, P.; Kobler, J.; Lutz, J.; Schaumberger, A.; Schaumberger, J.; Smetschka, B. et al. Combining Agent-Based and Stock-Flow Modelling Approaches in a Participative Analysis of the Integrated Land System in Reichraming, Austria. Landsc. Ecol.; 2009; 24, pp. 1149-1165. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-009-9356-6]

87. Haberl, H.; Erb, K.H.; Krausmann, F.; Adensam, H.; Schulz, N.B. Land-Use Change and Socio-Economic Metabolism in Austria—Part II: Land-Use Scenarios for 2020. Land Use Policy; 2003; 20, pp. 21-39. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-8377(02)00049-2]

88. Schirpke, U.; Leitinger, G.; Tasser, E.; Schermer, M.; Steinbacher, M.; Tappeiner, U. Multiple Ecosystem Services of a Changing Alpine Landscape: Past, Present and Future. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag.; 2013; 9, pp. 123-135. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2012.751936] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31491038]

89. Schmidt, J.; Leduc, S.; Dotzauer, E.; Schmid, E. Cost-Effective Policy Instruments for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction and Fossil Fuel Substitution through Bioenergy Production in Austria. Energy Policy; 2011; 39, pp. 3261-3280. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.018]

90. Scholz, J.; Breitwieser, F.; Mandl, P. Simulating the Forest Fuel Market as a Socio-Ecological System with Spatial Agent-Based Methods: A Case Study in Carinthia, Austria. Nat. Resour. Model.; 2021; 34, e12291. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nrm.12291]

91. Theurl, M.C.; Hörtenhuber, S.J.; Lindenthal, T.; Palme, W. Unheated Soil-Grown Winter Vegetables in Austria: Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Socio-Economic Factors of Diffusion Potential. J. Clean. Prod.; 2017; 151, pp. 134-144. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.016]

92. Winkler, T.; Winiwarter, W. Scenarios of Livestock—Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Austria. J. Integr. Environ. Sci.; 2015; 12, pp. 107-119. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2015.1110186]

93. Winkler, T.; Winiwarter, W. Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for Austria: A Comparison of Different Approaches to Emission Trends. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change; 2016; 21, pp. 1181-1196. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11027-015-9642-3]

94. Gass, V.; Schmidt, J.; Schmid, E. Analysis of Alternative Policy Instruments to Promote Electric Vehicles in Austria. Renew. Energy; 2014; 61, pp. 96-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.08.012]

95. Kapeller, M.L.; Füllsack, M.; Jäger, G. Holiday Travel Behaviour and Correlated CO₂ Emissions-Modelling Trend and Future Scenarios for Austrian Tourists. Sustain; 2019; 11, 6418. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11226418]

96. Meyer, I.; Wessely, S. Fuel Efficiency of the Austrian Passenger Vehicle Fleet-Analysis of Trends in the Technological Profile and Related Impacts on CO₂ Emissions. Energy Policy; 2009; 37, pp. 3779-3789. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.011]

97. Rauch, P.; Gronalt, M. The Effects of Rising Energy Costs and Transportation Mode Mix on Forest Fuel Procurement Costs. Biomass Bioenergy; 2011; 35, pp. 690-699. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.10.015]

98. Seebauer, S.; Kulmer, V.; Fruhmann, C. Promoting Adoption While Avoiding Rebound: Integrating Disciplinary Perspectives on Market Diffusion and Carbon Impacts of Electric Cars and Building Renovations in Austria. Energy Sustain. Soc.; 2019; 9, 26. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0212-5]

99. Smetschka, B.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Egger, C.; Haselsteiner, E.; Moran, D.; Gaube, V. Time Matters: The Carbon Footprint of Everyday Activities in Austria. Ecol. Econ.; 2019; 164, 106357. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106357]

100. Baiardi, D.; Morana, C. Climate Change Awareness: Empirical Evidence for the European Union. Energy Econ.; 2021; 96, 105163. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105163]

101. Krenek, A. How to Implement a WTO-Compatible Full Border Carbon Adjustment as an Important Part of the European Green Deal; Österreichische Gesellschaft für Europapolitik: Vienna, Austria, 2020; pp. 1-9.

102. Republic of Austria Out of a Sense of Responsibility for Austria. Available online: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/en/federal-chancellery/the-austrian-federal-government/government-documents.html (accessed on 23 June 2022).

103. FAS Sebastian Kurz Im Interview “Eine Schuldenunion Wird Es Mit Uns Nicht Geben”. Available online: https://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/sebastian-kurz-im-interview-eine-schuldenunion-wird-es-mit-uns-nicht-geben-16856542.html (accessed on 23 June 2022).

104. Landis, F.; Heindl, P. ZEW Publication: Renewable Energy Targets in the Context of the EU ETS: Whom Do They Benefit Exactly? (Discussion Paper No. 16-026); ZEW-Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research: Mannheim, Germany, 2016.

105. EAA Climate Protection Report (Klimaschutzbericht) 2017 (No. REP-0622). Available online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/rep0622.pdf (accessed on 23 June 2022).

106. EEA Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD). Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/esd-2#:~:text=TheEffortSharingDecision(ESD)No406%2F2009%2F,%2Cbuildings%2Cagricultureandwaste (accessed on 1 December 2021).

107. UBA GHG Projections and Assessment of Policies and Measures in Austria. Available online: https://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/rep0766.pdf (accessed on 23 June 2022).

108. Kratena, K.; Meyer, I.; Sommer, M. Alternative Szenarien Zur Entwicklung Des Energieverbrauchs in Osterreich: Der Einfluss Der CO₂-Und Energiepreise Bis 2030. (Long-Term Energy Use in Austria: The Impacts of Carbon and Energy Prices up to 2030. With English Summary.). Available online: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoh&AN=1452448&site=ehost-live%0Ahttp://www.wifo.ac.at/en/publications/wifo-monatsberichte (accessed on 23 June 2022).

109. Großmann, A.; Stocker, A. Evaluation von Klimaschutzmaßnahmen Mit Dem Modell E3. at MeetPASS: Meeting the Paris Agreement and Supporting Sustainability Working Paper No. 5; Gesellschaft für wirtschaftliche Strukt, SERI (Sustainable Europe Research Institute): Osnabrück, Germany, 2019; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32733.44000]

110. Großmann, A.; Lutz, C.; Meyer, B.; Wiebe, K.; Wolter, M. Wissenschaftliche Studie Zur Modellierung Und Simulierung Einer Ökosozialen Steuerstrukturreform in Österreich. Studie Im Auftrag Des Ökosozialen. Proceedings of the Forums Österreich, Julius Raab Stiftung, Energie Steiermark AG, Gewerkschaft PRO-GE, Senat der Wirtschaft Öst. Greenpeace, Schachinger Logistik, Global 2000; Osnabrück, Germany, 2014.

111. Wolter, M.I.; Großmann, A.; Frank-Stocker, A.; Polzin, C. Auswirkungen von Energiepolitischen Maßnahmen Auf Wirtscha, Energiesystem Und Private Haushalte; SERI und gws: Wien, Austria, 2011.

112. Kirchner, M.; Sommer, M.W.; Kratena, K. Distributional Impacts of a CO₂ Fuel Tax on Different Household Income Quintiles in Austria. Proceedings of the 2017 International Energy Workshop College; College Park, MD, USA, 12–14 July 2017.

113. Kletzan, D.; Köppl, A.; Kratena, K. Ziele Und Optionen Der Steuerreform: Optionen Für Eine Ökologisierung Des Österreichischen Steuersystems; WIFO—Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung: Vienna, Austria, 2008.

114. Großmann, A.; Wolter, M.I.; Hinterberger, F.; Püls, L. Die Auswirkungen von Klimapolitischen Maßnahmen Auf Den Österreichischen Arbeitsmarkt; ExpertInnenbericht GWS: Osnabrück, Germany, 2020.

115. Stocker, A.; Polzin, C.; Arzberger, T.; Seri, F.H.; Großmann, A.; Ingo, M.; Gws, W.; Rahmen, I. Verteilungseffekte Und Reformoptionen Ausgewählter Energiepolitischer Maßnahmen. Projekt KONSENS: KonsumentInnen Und Energiesparmaßnahmen; SERI und gws: Vienna, Austria, 2011.

116. Breuss, F.; Steininger, K. Reducing the Greenhouse Effect in Austria. A General Equilibrium Evaluation of CO₂-Policy-Options. Available online: https://epub.wu.ac.at/262/1/document.pdf (accessed on 23 June 2022).

Word count: 14597

Show less

© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.

Abstract

Translate

In the context of the European Green Deal, the European Commission and the European Parliament proposed to intensify Europe’s ambition for its 2030 climate targets. In the case of Austria, the current government set itself the goal of being carbon neutral by 2040. The Federal Chancellery of Austria also presented a plan to introduce a carbon price for emissions from the non-EU ETS; a task force is underway to launch a formal proposal in 2022, and thus it is relevant to investigate the present stage of scientific research on carbon pricing in Austria. Therefore, the present paper examines and evaluates scientific publications using bibliometric techniques, combined with a systematic literature review (SLR). Our results show that even though the current government presented a plan to introduce a carbon price, there are still uncertainties about the design of the carbon pricing instrument, the institutional and regulatory framework, revenue recycling policies, impacts on sectoral GDP, competitiveness indicators and international trade. Furthermore, the transport sector was the largest contributor to the increase in total emissions in recent years in Austria; therefore, it requires special attention in terms of mitigating and adaptive measures.

Details

Title

Current Status and Future Perspectives of Carbon Pricing Research in Austria

Author

Santos, Luan¹

; Steininger, Karl²

; Marcelle Candido Cordeiro³; Vogel, Johanna⁴

¹ Production Engineering Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 27930-560, Brazil; Faculty of Business Administration and Accounting Sciences, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 22290-240, Brazil
² Department of Economics, University of Graz, 8010 Graz, Austria; Wegener Center for Climate and Global Change, University of Graz, 8010 Graz, Austria
³ Production Engineering Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 27930-560, Brazil
⁴ Environment Agency Austria, 1090 Vienna, Austria

First page

9684

Publication year

2022

Publication date

2022

Publisher

MDPI AG

e-ISSN

20711050

Source type

Scholarly Journal

Language of publication

English

DOI

https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159684

ProQuest document ID

2700788567

Current Status and Future Perspectives of Carbon Pricing Research in Austria

Jump to:

Full Text

Abstract

Details

Suggested sources