Neoclassical economists have long advocated for carbon pricing to become the cornerstone of climate policy and a large number of carbon pricing schemes have been implemented over time. However, carbon pricing has had only marginal effects on emissions to date. In response, many economists prioritise carbon pricing implementation research, aiming to make carbon pricing work better, while other researchers have become increasingly sceptical about whether carbon pricing is still adequate to halt climate breakdown.

This thesis begins by asking on what theoretical choices and omissions the continued approval of carbon pricing relies. I identify (1) political feasibility, (2) justice, and (3) effectiveness with respect to climate stabilisation as three relevant dimensions against which carbon pricing can be measured. Carbon pricing implementation research investigates feasibility and justice only in an instrumental manner, and rarely considers effectiveness at all. By contrast, this thesis seeks to explore how these dimensions can be understood on their own terms. Through a multidisciplinary review, I position carbon pricing implementation research in relation to relevant disciplines and characterise theoretical choices as well as analytical omissions. By exploring feasibility, justice and effectiveness on their own terms, however, this thesis also alludes to possibilities beyond carbon pricing. My research substantiates key analytical omissions in carbon pricing implementation research related to power relations, wellbeing, and systemic constraints and delineates implications for a climate policy and research agenda. This dissertation takes a pluralist approach to (economic) theory and is aligned with a critical realist philosophy of science.

The research body of this thesis consists of three research articles. The first paper investigates the normative assumptions about well-being and politics that underpin the theoretical case for carbon pricing and sheds light on blind spots, while the second and the third paper extend the focus beyond carbon pricing. The second paper delves into the implications of unequal gender power relations in the formulation of a just decarbonisation strategy within the road transport sector. The third paper explores the entangled socio-material relations that influence the state’s capacity to phase-out fossil fuels in the aviation sector.

The articles contribute to an improved understanding of the dimensions and requirements of justice in climate policy beyond compensation, the potential gendered implications of systemic interventions for climate stabilisation, as well as the manifold state capacities for enacting fossil phase-out, and the actors and evolving power relations supporting such a shift.

This thesis concludes that more stringent carbon pricing is unlikely to lead to the structural change required for effective climate stabilisation, nor will it become politically feasible. A climate policy and research agenda focused on carbon pricing risks lacking analytical precision and practical relevance, while implicitly supporting interests vested in the status quo. Reconceptualising climate breakdown in neoclassical economics is necessary and possible, yet carbon pricing may have to give way.