Environmental Taxation as a Tool for Sustainable Development: International Experience and Opportunities for Kazakhstan

Objective of the study. The study aims to analyze the international experience of using environmental taxation as a tool for ensuring sustainability in the context of global economic development. The goal is to develop practical recommendations for improving the system of environmental taxes and payments in Kazakhstan, considering national sustainable development priorities and environmental challenges.

Research methodology. The research applies methods of analysis of strategic and regulatory documents from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the European Union (EU), and selected countries (Germany, Sweden, South Korea), as well as systemic, comparative, institutional, economic, and statistical analysis methods.

Uniqueness / value of the study. The value of the study lies in the comprehensive comparison of international models of environmental taxation with Kazakhstan’s experience in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly points 7, 12, 13, and 15. Special attention is given to the need to shift from a fiscally oriented environmental taxation model to a more stimulating and regulatory model aimed at changing the behavior of economic agents and establishing "green" incentives.

Research findings. The study identifies that in developed countries; environmental taxes are used as a key tool for reducing the carbon intensity of the economy and stimulating "green" investments. In Kazakhstan, the main institutional and fiscal barriers to implementing environmental taxation have been identified. Recommendations have been developed for the reform of environmental taxes, including the differentiation of rates based on the level of environmental harm, expanding tax incentives for «green» technologies, and integrating environmental indicators into the tax administration system.

1. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://www.un.org/en/development (English)

2. OECD. (2019). Environmental taxation: A guide for policy makers. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://www.oecd.org/env/tools-evaluation/48164926.pdf (English)

3. European Commission. (2023). Environmental tax statistics in the European Union. Brussels. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/17354 (English)

4. Andersson, J. J. (2019). Carbon taxes and CO₂ emissions: Sweden as a case study. Energy Policy, 127, 94–102. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170144 (English)

5. World Bank Group. (2022). Kazakhstan country climate and development report. World Bank Group, Washington, DC. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://documents.banquemondiale.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/099420411012246024 (English)

6. Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2023). Report on the implementation of the Paris Agreement. Astana. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://eco.gov.kz (English)

7. Askarova, E., Taibek, Zh., Kulbai, B., & Urazbayeva, Z. (2025). Ekologicheskoe nalogooblozhenie v Kazakhstane: Perekhod ot fiskal'nogo instrumenta k mekhanizmu ustoichivoi transformatsii ekonomiki. Statistika, uchet i audit, 3(98), 93–108. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.51579/1563 (Russian)

8. Nurkasheva, N. S., Imataeva, A. E., Andossova, A. R., & Uzun, Y. U. (2024). Features of the organization of environmental accounting in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Journal of Economic Research & Business Administration, 2(148), 179–192. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.26577/be.2024148-b2-015 (English)

9. Singh, A., & Wang, J. (2025). Pigouvian taxes and market behavior: A theoretical review. Ecological Economics, 217, Article 108456. Retrieved December 30, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108456 (English)

10. Kim, S., & Lee, D. (2025). Environmental tax policy and the Sustainable Development Goals: A policy coherence perspective. Environmental Science & Policy, 146, Article 104865. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104865 (English)

11. Müller, F., & Svensson, T. (2025). Carbon taxes and renewable energy adoption in Europe: A panel analysis. Energy Economics, 118, Article 108367. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108367 (English)

12. Gupta, R., & Torres, M. (2025). Carbon pricing and economic transformation: Evidence from OECD and non-OECD countries. Energy Policy, 176, Article 113218. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2025.113218 (English)

13. Fernandez, L., & Martínez, P. (2025). Assessing the ex-post effectiveness of carbon pricing: A systematic review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 177, Article 113489. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.113489 (English)

14. Brown, T., & Ahmed, S. (2025). Environmental taxation and environmental quality across income groups: A quantile panel study. Journal of Environmental Management, 345, Article 118282. Retrieved December 29, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.118282 (English)

15. O’Connor, D., & Zhou, Y. (2025). Green fiscal policies and ecological footprint reduction. Ecological Indicators, 148, Article 109756. Retrieved December 30, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.109756 (English)

16. Li, X., & Smith, J. (2025). Double dividend hypothesis revisited: Empirical insights from carbon tax reforms. Resource and Energy Economics, 71, Article 101387. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2025.101387 (English)

17. Ahmed, R., & Patel, K. (2025). Social equity implications of environmental taxation. Ecological Economics, 220, Article 108612. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108612 (English)

18. Manta, A. G., Doran, N. M., Badyrcha, R. M., Badareu, G., & Tsaran, A. M. (2023). Does the implementation of a Pigouvian tax be considered an effective approach to address climate change mitigation? Economic Analysis and Policy, 78, 488–502. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2023.11.002 (English)

19. Patuelli, R., Nijkamp, P., & Pels, E. (2005). Environmental tax reform and the double dividend: A metaanalysis. Ecological Economics, 55(4), 564–583. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.018 (English)

20. Regeringskansliet (Government Offices of Sweden). (2025). Carbon tax in Sweden: Rates and development. Stockholm. Retrieved January 3, 2026, from https://www.government.se/government-policy/taxes-and-tariffs/carbon-tax (English)

21. International Carbon Action Partnership. (2025). Emissions trading worldwide: Status report 2025. Berlin. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://icapcarbonaction.com/en/ets-map (English)

22. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2025). Effective carbon rates 2025: Pricing carbon emissions through taxes and emissions trading. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/effective-carbon-rates-2025.htm (English)

23. OECD. (2025). Effective carbon rates 2025. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/effective-carbon-rates.htm (English)

24. Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2024). Kazakhstan Emissions Trading System: Allocation Plan 2022–2025. Astana. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://eco.gov.kz (English)

25. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/ RES/70/1). Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ares70d1_ru.pdf (English)

26. OECD. (2022). Environmental taxation and green growth: Policy insights and best practices. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://www.oecd.org/environment/tools-evaluation/environmental-taxation-and-green-growth.htm (English)

27. European Commission. (2023). EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets_en (English)

28. World Bank. (2021). Carbon pricing in practice: A review of the French carbon tax. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/957291616907432838/carbon-pricing-in-practice-france (English)

29. ISPT. (2023). The Dutch Climate Agreement on industry. ISPT. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://ispt.eu/news/the-dutch-climate-agreement-on (English)

30. World Bank. (2022). China’s national carbon market: Opportunities and challenges. Retrieved January 2, 2026, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2022/07/01/china-national-carbon-market (English)

31. International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP). (2023). China national ETS. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://icapcarbonaction.com/en/ets-map?etsid=70 (English)

32. Singapore Government. (2023). Carbon tax. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://www.mewr.gov.sg/environment/carbon-tax (English)

33. Government of Canada. (2023). Carbon tax. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate (English)

34. Qazaqstan Respublikasy. (2015). Qazaqstan Respublikasynyn salyq Kodeksi: 2008 zhylgy 10 zheltoksandagy № 99-IV zan, 2026 zhylgy ozgeristermen. Adilet [web-sait]. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K2500000214 (Kazakh)

35. QR USB derekteri. (2026). Retrieved January 7, 2026, from: https://stat.gov.kz (Kazakh)

36. OECD. (2024). Carbon pricing in Kazakhstan. Retrieved January 7, 2026, from https://www.oecdilibrary.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/carbon-pricing-and-energy-taxes/carbon-pricingkazakhstan.pdf (English)