Socioeconomic Impacts of Long-Term Renewable Electricity Generation: a Multi-regional Analysis for Brazil
This thesis contributes to long-term renewable energy policymaking in developing economies by quantifying the net multi-regional macroeconomic, sectoral, and distributional impacts of renewable electricity investment in the case of Brazil from 2020 to 2050. Brazil has an outstanding potential for renewable electricity generation concentrated in its least developed region, the Northeast. New wind and solar power plants are currently channelling unprecedented investments to the Northeast, which should continue in the long run to maintain the low-carbon profile of electricity generation, potentially creating positive socioeconomic impacts and reducing regional inequalities. This thesis developed a recursive-dynamic Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model called TERM-BR E15, which has representations of Brazil’s five official geoeconomic regions, nine electricity generation sources, ten household income bands and ten wage levels. The CGE model simulations consist of soft links with three energy-system models which provided two long-term renewable electricity policy scenarios and a baseline. Additionally, two industrial strategy options were simulated. Modelling results were tested against the policymaking process through an expert elicitation in which 13 senior-level institutions’ representatives of the sector in Brazil provided their insights. Results indicate that the more solar and wind power installed capacity in 2050, the more socioeconomic benefits to Brazil’s Northeast region, suggesting that a long-term renewable pathway is not only technically feasible, but also economically and socially beneficial. Regional GDP gains in the Northeast would be between 1.91% and 4.98% relative to the baseline in policy scenarios. All socioeconomic variables analysed indicate gains to the Northeast and reduced regional inequalities. Regional industrial policy in the Northeast yields more positive national results than incentives to specific components nationally, while developing the Northeast economy even further through new manufacturing segments. Socioeconomic development, however, entails structural change in various aspects beyond the scope of modelling that require multi-objective policies across government levels and departments.