Ayunisa Faradita (1), Angelina Sech Putri Yulia Utono (2), Keisha Cassandra (3)
General Background: Carbon pricing is an environmental law instrument that integrates climate mitigation, economic development, and intergenerational responsibility through regulatory mechanisms. Specific Background: Indonesia establishes a statutory carbon tax within a national carbon-economic-value framework, whereas the Netherlands applies an industrial CO2 levy alongside the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Knowledge Gap: Existing scholarship insufficiently integrates these distinct legal architectures into a common framework addressing institutional coordination, environmental integrity, distributive justice, and long-term sustainability. Aims: This study compares the philosophical and legal foundations of carbon pricing in both jurisdictions and examines how sustainable development principles are operationalized through environmental regulation. Results: Using normative-comparative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, the analysis identifies two institutional pathways: national regulatory integration in Indonesia and multilevel climate governance in the Netherlands. Five interdependent requirements emerge: environmental credibility, legal certainty, institutional coordination, distributive justice, and intergenerational responsibility, supported by transparent monitoring, reporting, verification, and carbon registry systems. Novelty: The study establishes an integrated comparative legal framework connecting carbon taxation, emissions trading, institutional accountability, information integrity, and sustainability principles beyond conventional fiscal analysis. Implications: The findings provide normative guidance for coherent carbon-pricing legislation, transparent regulatory administration, equitable transition arrangements, and context-specific climate governance without assuming legal equivalence or demonstrated emissions outcomes.
Highlights:
Indonesia adopts national regulatory integration, while Dutch industrial taxation operates alongside the EU ETS.
Five interconnected legal requirements underpin credible and equitable climate governance.
Transparent emissions monitoring and registry infrastructure support accountability and long-term regulatory certainty.
Keywords: Carbon Tax, Sustainable Development, Environmental Law, Carbon Pricing, Comparative Law
[1] G. R. Timilsina, “Carbon taxes,” Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1456–1502, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1257/jel.20211560.
[2] D. P. Ramadhani and Y. Koo, “Comparative analysis of carbon border tax adjustment and domestic carbon tax under general equilibrium model: Focusing on the Indonesian economy,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 377, Art. no. 134288, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134288.
[3] Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 7 of 2021 on Harmonization of Tax Regulations. Jakarta, Indonesia, 2021.
[4] Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Regulation No. 98 of 2021 on the Implementation of Carbon Economic Value for Achieving the Nationally Determined Contribution Target and Greenhouse Gas Emission Control in National Development. Jakarta, Indonesia, 2021. Repealed by Presidential Regulation No. 110 of 2025.
[5] Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Regulation No. 110 of 2025 on the Implementation of Carbon Economic Value Instruments and National Greenhouse Gas Emission Control. Jakarta, Indonesia, 2025.
[6] Nederlandse Emissieautoriteit, “CO2-heffing,” Government of the Netherlands. Accessed: Sep. 26, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.emissieautoriteit.nl/regelgeving/co2-heffing
[7] Nederlandse Emissieautoriteit, “Wat is de CO2-heffing?” Government of the Netherlands. Accessed: Sep. 26, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.emissieautoriteit.nl/regelgeving/co2-heffing/wat-is-co2-heffing
[8] Government of the Netherlands, “Mitigating climate change,” Government.nl. Accessed: Sep. 26, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.government.nl/topics/climate-change
[9] D. Hartono, W. Indriyani, B. S. Iryani, A. Komarulzaman, A. Nugroho, and R. Kurniawan, “Carbon tax, energy policy, and sustainable development in Indonesia,” Sustainable Development, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 2332–2346, 2023, doi: 10.1002/sd.2511.
[10] W. Sunanda, M. I. B. Setyonegoro, S. P. Hadi, and Sarjiya, “Advancing the carbon pricing framework in Indonesia: A systematic review of policies, challenges, and global lessons,” Results in Engineering, vol. 28, Art. no. 107155, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2025.107155.
[11] I. P. G. Parwata and I. A. Sadnyini, “The sustainable development paradigm through carbon tax legal construction,” Jurnal Hukum Prasada, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 82–91, 2024, doi: 10.22225/jhp.11.2.2024.82-91.
[12] D. Rahmasari, S. A. Iskandar, and R. D. Prasetiya, “Carbon tax study as a social engineering tool in realizing the agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Indonesia,” Ikatan Penulis Mahasiswa Hukum Indonesia Law Journal, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 147–165, 2024, doi: 10.15294/ipmhi.v4i1.71582.
[13] J. K. Boyce, M. Ash, and B. Ranalli, “Environmental justice and carbon pricing: Can they be reconciled?” Global Challenges, vol. 7, no. 4, Art. no. 2200204, 2023, doi: 10.1002/gch2.202200204.
[14] J. Gupta, A. Gupta, and C. Vegelin, “Equity, justice and the SDGs: Lessons learnt from two decades of INEA scholarship,” International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, vol. 22, pp. 393–409, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10784-022-09563-w.
[15] K. Mintz-Woo, “Carbon pricing is not unjust,” Global Challenges, vol. 8, no. 1, Art. no. 2300089, 2024, doi: 10.1002/gch2.202300089.
[16] S. Sommer, L. Mattauch, and M. Pahle, “Supporting carbon taxes: The role of fairness,” Ecological Economics, vol. 195, Art. no. 107359, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107359.
[17] S. Zhao, S. Fujimori, T. Hasegawa, K. Oshiro, and K. Sasaki, “Poverty and inequality implications of carbon pricing under the long-term climate target,” Sustainability Science, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 2513–2528, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11625-022-01206-y.
[18] P. Minnerop, “The ‘advance interference-like effect’ of climate targets: Fundamental rights, intergenerational equity and the German Federal Constitutional Court,” Journal of Environmental Law, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 135–162, 2022, doi: 10.1093/jel/eqab041.
[19] Kingdom of the Netherlands, Wet belastingen op milieugrondslag, art. 71j, current text in force in 2026.
[20] Nederlandse Emissieautoriteit, “Tarieven CO2-heffing,” Government of the Netherlands, 2026. Accessed: Sep. 26, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.emissieautoriteit.nl/regelgeving/co2-heffing/tarieven
[21] J. Colmer, R. Martin, M. Muûls, and U. J. Wagner, “Does pricing carbon mitigate climate change? Firm-level evidence from the European Union Emissions Trading System,” The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 1625–1660, 2025, doi: 10.1093/restud/rdae055.
[22] Republic of Indonesia, Regulation of the Minister of Environment/Head of the Environmental Control Agency No. 10 of 2026 on the Carbon Unit Registry System. Jakarta, Indonesia, 2026.
[23] European Parliament and Council of the European Union, “Directive (EU) 2023/959 of 10 May 2023 amending Directive 2003/87/EC and Decision (EU) 2015/1814,” Official Journal of the European Union, vol. L 130, pp. 134–202, 2023.
[24] Ministry of Climate and Green Growth, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Klimaatplan 2025–2035: Op weg naar een klimaatneutraal Nederland. The Hague, Netherlands, Mar. 2025.
[25] Republic of Indonesia, Regulation of the Minister of Forestry No. 6 of 2026 on Procedures for Carbon Trading through Greenhouse Gas Emission Offsets in the Forestry Sector. Jakarta, Indonesia, 2026.
[26] M. Ahmad, X. F. Li, and Q. Wu, “Carbon taxes and emission trading systems: Which one is more effective in reducing carbon emissions? A meta-analysis,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 476, Art. no. 143761, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143761.
[27] K. Gugler, A. Haxhimusa, and M. Liebensteiner, “Carbon pricing and emissions: Causal effects of Britain’s carbon tax,” Energy Economics, vol. 121, Art. no. 106655, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106655.
[28] B. Shang, “The poverty and distributional impacts of carbon pricing: Channels and policy implications,” Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 64–85, 2023, doi: 10.1086/723899.
[29] C.-H. Shei, J. C.-E. Liu, and I.-Y. L. Hsieh, “Distributional effects of carbon pricing: An analysis of income-based versus expenditure-based approaches,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 465, Art. no. 141446, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141446.
[30] Y. Li and X. Zhang, “Recycling scheme of carbon pricing for inclusive decarbonization and energy transition: A recursive computable general equilibrium analysis in China,” Renewable Energy, vol. 217, Art. no. 119130, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.119130.
[31] D. Muth, “Pathways to stringent carbon pricing: Configurations of political economy conditions and revenue recycling strategies. A comparison of thirty national level policies,” Ecological Economics, vol. 214, Art. no. 107995, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107995.
[32] M. Bergquist, A. Nilsson, N. Harring, and S. C. Jagers, “Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws,” Nature Climate Change, vol. 12, pp. 235–240, 2022, doi: 10.1038/s41558-022-01297-6.
[33] J. Barrez, “Public acceptability of carbon pricing: Unravelling the impact of revenue recycling,” Climate Policy, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1323–1345, 2024, doi: 10.1080/14693062.2024.2376747.
[34] J. Sitarz, M. Pahle, S. Osorio, G. Luderer, and R. C. Pietzcker, “EU carbon prices signal high policy credibility and farsighted actors,” Nature Energy, vol. 9, pp. 691–702, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41560-024-01505-x.
[35] C. Zimm, K. Mintz-Woo, E. Brutschin, S. Hanger-Kopp, R. Hoffmann, J. S. Kikstra, M. Kuhn, J. Min, R. Muttarak, S. Pachauri, O. Patange, K. Riahi, and T. Schinko, “Justice considerations in climate research,” Nature Climate Change, vol. 14, pp. 22–30, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41558-023-01869-0.