Incentives to diffuse advanced abatement technology under environmental liability law

Polluting firms with advanced abatement technology at their disposal have incentives or disincentives to share this technology with other polluting firms. The ‘direction’ and extent of those incentives depends on the liability rule applicable and the way technical change impacts marginal abatement costs. We establish that incentives for diffusion are socially optimal under strict liability and socially suboptimal under negligence if technical change lowers marginal abatement costs for all levels of abatement. Negligence may, however, induce better diffusion incentives than strict liability if technical change decreases (increases) marginal abatement costs for low (high) levels of abatement.     

Cost-Effective Policies to Improve Urban Air Quality in Santiago, Chile

This paper examines the applicability of market-based incentives for controlling emissions of particulate matter from fixed sources, in a developing-country context. It uses Santiago, Chile as a case study. A linear programming model has been developed to establish the costs of achieving different air quality targets using marketable permits and command-and-control (CAC) policies. The main conclusion is that an ambient permit system (APS) substantially reduces compliance costs of achieving a given air quality target at each receptor location in the city. Consequently, the use of permits is warranted. However, spatial differentiation of permits is required, thus complicating the design and use of such an instrument. Moreover, the reduction in compliance costs under APS is significantly less when the air quality targets imposed for each receptor location are the same as those achieved by other CAC policies.     

Pollution Taxes and Pollution Abatement in an Oligopoly Supergame

This paper investigates the effects of an emissions tax on the incentives for oligopolists to acquire alternative pollution abatement technologies. The analysis is conducted in terms of a repeated game and it is demonstrated that there are circumstances in which the firms may reject the option of acquiring the pollution abatement equipment, even when this lowers their production costs.     

International environmental agreements with consistent conjectures

We introduce consistent conjectures into Barrett (1994) canonical model of international environmental agreements. The existing literature assumes inconsistent Nash conjectures, despite the fact that policymakers recognize that abatement levels are strategic substitutes and increases in abatement generate carbon leakage. With consistent conjectures much of the conventional wisdom is reversed. The non-cooperative abatement level is below the Nash equilibrium. The difference between Nash and consistent conjectures is greatest when benefits are large and costs are small. We find that large coalitions cannot form. However, small coalitions can result in substantial increases in abatement relative to the non-cooperative outcome.     

Tell the truth or not? The montero mechanism for emissions control at work

We experimentally test the truth-telling mechanism proposed by Montero (2008) for eliciting firms' abatement costs. We compare this mechanism with two well-known alternative allocation mechanisms, free and costly allocation of permits at the Pigouvian price. Controlling for the number of firms and the firms' maximal emissions, we find that, in line with the theoretical predictions, firms over-report their maximal emissions under free allocation of permits and under-report these under costly allocation of permits. Under Montero's mechanism, by contrast, firms almost always report their maximal emissions truthfully. However, in terms of efficiency, the difference between Montero's mechanism and costly allocation disappears with industries including more than one firm.     

Stochastic Pollution, Permits, and Merger Incentives

Pollution permit regulations introduce nonlinearities into the objective function of a polluting firm. We develop a microeconomic model to show the effects these nonlinearities might have upon firm decisions when emissions are stochastic. Under perfect competition the fraction of planned pollution covered by permits is shown to be separable from planned production. We also demonstrate that permit management incentives may motivate a merger of otherwise independent firms. Incentives to petition for “bubble” coverage are also considered. The model is studied under risk neutrality and risk aversion. Imperfectly competitive situations in the output and permit markets are also analyzed.     

The regulation of a spatially heterogeneous externality: Tradable groundwater permits to protect streams

Groundwater pumping can reduce the flow of surface water in nearby streams. In the United States, recent awareness of this externality has led to intra- and inter-state conflict and rapidly-changing water management policies and institutions. Although the marginal damage of groundwater use on stream flows depends crucially on the location of pumping relative to streams, current regulations are generally uniform over space. We use a population data set of irrigation wells in the Nebraska portion of the Republican River Basin to analyze whether adopting spatially differentiated groundwater pumping regulations leads to significant reductions in farmer abatement costs and costs from damage to streams. We find that regulators can generate most of the potential savings in total social costs without accounting for spatial heterogeneity. However, if regulators need to increase the protection of streams significantly from current levels, spatially differentiated policies will yield sizable cost savings.     

Cap-and-trade, taxes, and distributional conflict

Enacting market-based environmental regulation, such as emissions taxes and cap-and-trade programs, often create rents that are contested by agents. In this paper, we create a framework that compares social welfare from alternative market-based environmental policy instruments under the presence of rent seeking. We show that, contrary to the commonly held view, non-revenue-raising instruments (NRRIs) are in many cases preferable over revenue-raising instruments (RRIs). We find that the choice of instrument depends on the size of a potential revenue-recycling effect and the level of preassigned rents.     

Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically

Some environmentalists express concern that trade liberalization may damage the environment by giving governments incentives to relax environmental policies to give domestic producers a competitive advantage. Support for such concern may be given by models of imperfectly competitive trade where there may be “rent-shifting” incentives for governments to relax environmental policies. But there are also incentives for producers to act strategically, e.g., through their investment in R&D, and in this paper I extend the literature on strategic environmental policy by allowing for strategic behavior by producers as well as governments. I show that (i) allowing for producers to act strategically on balance reduces the incentive for governments to act strategically; (ii) allowing governments to act strategically increases the incentive for producers to act strategically; (iii) welfare is lower when both parties act strategically; and (iv) strategic behavior by producers and governments is greater when governments use emission taxes than when they use emission standards.     

Incentives and prices in an emissions trading scheme with updating

Emissions trading schemes where allocations are based on updated baseline emissions give firms less incentive to reduce emissions for a given quota (or allowance) price. Nevertheless, according to Böhringer and Lange [On the design of optimal grandfathering schemes for emission allowances, Europ. Econ. Rev. 49 (2005) 2041–2055], such allocation schemes are cost-effective if the system is closed and allocation rules are identical across firms. In this paper, we show that the cost-effective solution may be infeasible if marginal abatement costs grow too fast. Moreover, if a price cap or banking/borrowing is introduced, the abatement profile is no longer the same as in the case with an auction (or lump-sum allocation). In addition, we show that with allocation based on updated emissions, the quota price will always exceed marginal abatement costs, possibly misguiding policy makers and investors about abatement costs. Numerical simulations indicate that the quota price most likely will be several times higher than marginal abatement costs, unless a significant share of allowances is auctioned.     

Robust technology policy against emission leakage: The case of upstream subsidies

Asymmetric regulation of a global pollutant between countries can alter the competitiveness of industries and lead to emissions leakage, which hampers countries’ welfare. In order to limit leakage, governments consider supporting domestic trade-exposed firms by subsidizing their investments in abatement technology. The suppliers of such technologies tend to be less than perfectly competitive, particularly when both emissions regulations and advanced technologies are new. In this context of twin market failures, we consider the relative effects and desirability of subsidies for abatement technology. We find a more robust recommendation for upstream subsidies than for downstream subsidies. Downstream subsidies tend to increase global abatement technology prices, reduce pollution abatement abroad and increase emission leakage. On the contrary, upstream subsidies reduce abatement technology prices, and hence also emissions leakage.     

A note on optimal taxation of environmental spillovers

This note addresses the question of what policy the government should adopt when industrial pollution can be reduced partially by the imposition of effluent taxes and partially by a publicly operated waste treatment plant.In the case of increasing returns to public abatement, an effluent tax set at marginal user cost will not generate enough revenue to finance the facility. The key issue is that of finding additional revenue the most efficiently. Here, this question is dealt with in the framework of commodity taxation, with consideration given to the possibility that both effluent and commodity taxes derived on efficiency grounds might be quite regressive.     

Providing the Spark: Impact of financial incentives on battery electric vehicle adoption

To overcome adoption barriers and promote battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as an energy efficient consumer transportation option, a number of states offer subsidies to consumers for BEVs. We use a national data set of vehicle registrations and state-level financial incentives to assess the impact of vehicle purchase subsidies on adoption using both difference-in-differences and synthetic controls methods. We find that incentives offered as direct purchase rebates generate increased levels of new BEV registrations at a rate of approximately 8 percent per thousand dollars of incentive offered. Between 2011 and 2015, vehicle rebate incentives are associated with an increase in overall BEV registrations of approximately 11 percent. Our findings indicate incentives offered as state income tax credits do not have a statistically significant effect on BEV adoptions, though we caution this may be a result of limited temporal variation in BEV incentives across our sample. Responses to rebate incentives do not differ significantly by the make of the vehicle purchased (i.e., Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles). We combine our results with recent assessments of marginal environmental costs of electric vehicle charging and measure net welfare effects of BEV subsidy programs. Our analysis indicates these programs are not welfare-improving if only considering benefits associated with avoided emissions. Additional benefits associated with long-term market growth, production cost savings, network externalities, or accelerated innovation could substantially impact the net welfare outcomes.     

The strategic use of innovation to influence regulatory standards

This paper investigates the welfare consequences of strategic behavior by firms to affect the amount of environmental regulation they face. Environmental regulation often attempts to force an industry to develop cleaner technology, but the regulator may have no means to commit to a specific standard. This lack of regulatory commitment induces firms to choose innovation strategically. It is well-known that firms have incentives to suppress innovation to induce the regulator to ratchet down the standard, and this strategic behavior lowers welfare. This paper explores a countervailing incentive. In oligopoly settings, firms have heightened incentives to innovate so as to increase regulation and raise rivals costs. In equilibrium, the incentive to raise rivals cost can mitigate the welfare loss arising from no regulatory commitment. Also, a regulator who is unable to commit ex ante to the stringency of a regulatory standard can induce more clean technology than a regulator with a commitment mechanism.     

The strategic use of innovation to influence regulatory standards

This paper investigates the welfare consequences of strategic behavior by firms to affect the amount of environmental regulation they face. Environmental regulation often attempts to force an industry to develop cleaner technology, but the regulator may have no means to commit to a specific standard. This lack of regulatory commitment induces firms to choose innovation strategically. It is well-known that firms have incentives to suppress innovation to induce the regulator to ratchet down the standard, and this strategic behavior lowers welfare. This paper explores a countervailing incentive. In oligopoly settings, firms have heightened incentives to innovate so as to increase regulation and raise rivals costs. In equilibrium, the incentive to raise rivals cost can mitigate the welfare loss arising from no regulatory commitment. Also, a regulator who is unable to commit ex ante to the stringency of a regulatory standard can induce more clean technology than a regulator with a commitment mechanism.     

The social costs of second-best policies: Evidence from agricultural GHG mitigation

This paper investigates the social costs of second-best agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policies. Adjustments along the land use and input intensity margins are represented within a regionalized optimization model of California crop production calibrated to economic and agronomic information. Second-best policies relying on spatially aggregated GHG emission factors lead to small abatement efficiency losses, while policies targeting a single GHG lead to moderate losses. In contrast, policies targeting a single input entail large abatement efficiency losses, which nonetheless can be reduced by combining instruments.     

Pollution taxes and standards: A continuum of quasi-optimal solutions

A generalized second-best problem, involving a perfectly competitive industry which produces a pollution type of externality, is examined. The pollution tax is allowed to assume an arbitrary value (possibly zero), while a pollution standard, set as a ratio of pollution to output, is determined by a first-order optimizing condition. The general condition for a set of quasi-optimal solutions includes the Pareto-optimal solution as a special case. It is also found that when the pollution tax is below the optimal level, the usual implication is that the standard should be set so that the marginal cost of pollution reduction exceeds the marginal external damage.     

Modeling the impact of uncertainty in emissions trading markets with bankable permits

The various forms of uncertainty that firms may face in bankable emission permit trading markets will affect firms’ decision making as well as their market performance. This research explores the effect of increased uncertainty over future input costs and output prices on the temporal distribution of emission. In a dynamic programming setting, the permit price is a convex function of stochastic prices of coal and electricity. Increased uncertainty about future market conditions increases the expected permit price and causes a risk neutral firm to reduce ex ante emissions in order to smooth out marginal abatement costs over time. Finally, safety valves, both low-side and high-side, are suggested to reduce the impact of uncertainty in bankable emission trading markets.     

The principal–agent model with multilateral externalities: An application to climate agreements

We consider contracting of a principal with an agent if multilateral externalities are present. The motivating example is that of an international climate agreement given private information about the willingness-to-pay (WTP) for emissions abatement. Due to multilateral externalities the principal uses her own emissions besides subsidies to incentivize the agent and to assure his participation. Optimal contracts equalize marginal abatement costs and, thus, can be implemented by a system of competitive permit trading. Moreover, optimal contracts can include a boundary part (i.e., the endogenous, type dependent participation constraint is binding), which is not a copy of the outside option of no contract. Compared to this outside option, a contract can increase emissions of the principal for types with a low WTP, and reduce her payoff for high types. Subsidies can be constant or even decreasing in emission reductions, and turn negative so that the agent reduces emissions and pays the principal.