ArticleNature communications2024
Systematic review and meta-analysis of ex-post evaluations on the effectiveness of carbon pricing.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unlocking the financing potential of forest-based carbon assets: a valuation framework for pledge lending under uncertainty in China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- No evidence that nonincentivized behavioral interventions effectively mitigate climate change after adjusting for publication bias.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Synergistic pretreatment: hybrid strategies for maximum lignocellulose valorization.Biodegradation · 2026Review
- Climate policy portfolios that accelerate emission reductions.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Research on Forest Carbon Sequestration and Its Economic Valuation: A Case Study of the Zixi Mountain Nature Reserve, Chuxiong Prefecture.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Technology innovation and environmental outcomes of road transportation policy instruments.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Carbon markets: a new form of colonialism for Indigenous Peoples?The Lancet. Planetary health · 2025Review
- Carbon pricing reduces emissions.Nature · 2024Article
- What's the best way to tackle climate change? An 'evidence bank' could help scientists find answers.Nature · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Today, more than 70 carbon pricing schemes have been implemented around the globe, but their contributions to emissions reductions remains a subject of heated debate in science and policy. Here we assess the effectiveness of carbon pricing in reducing emissions using a rigorous, machine-learning assisted systematic review and meta-analysis. Based on 483 effect sizes extracted from 80 causal ex-post evaluations across 21 carbon pricing schemes, we find that introducing a carbon price has yielded immediate and substantial emission reductions for at least 17 of these policies, despite the low level of prices in most instances. Statistically significant emissions reductions range between -5% to -21% across the schemes (-4% to -15% after correcting for publication bias). Our study highlights critical evidence gaps with regard to dozens of unevaluated carbon pricing schemes and the price elasticity of emissions reductions. More rigorous synthesis of carbon pricing and other climate policies is required across a range of outcomes to advance our understanding of "what works" and accelerate learning on climate solutions in science and policy.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.