Carbon leakage and capacity-based allocations: Is the EU right?

Competitiveness and carbon leakage are major concerns for the design of CO₂ emissions permits markets. In the absence of a global carbon tax and of border carbon adjustments, output-based allocation is a third-best solution and is actually implemented (Australia, California, New Zealand). The EU has followed a different route; free allowances are allocated to existing or new capacities in proportion to a benchmark, independent of actual production. This paper compares these two schemes in a formal setting and shows that the optimal one is in fact a combination of both schemes, or output-based allocation alone if uncertainty is limited. A key assumption of our analysis is that the short-term import pressure depends both on the existing capacities and the level of demand, which is typical in capital intensive and internationally traded sectors. A calibration of the model is used to discuss the EU scheme for the cement sector in the third phase of the EU-ETS (2013–2020). This allows for a quantification of various policies in terms of welfare, investment, production, company profits, public revenues and leakage.     

Heterogeneous firms and the environment: a cap-and-trade program

Currently, cap-and-trade programs are a cornerstone of many countries' climate change policies and proposals. This paper investigates the economic and environmental effects of different climate change policy designs in a general equilibrium setting with heterogeneous firms and monopolistic competition. The analysis predicts that the cap on emissions perfectly defines the environmental quality but has no effect on firms' profits, or decisions to enter or exit the market. In contrast, increasing the share of free allocations of emission allowances, as opposed to auctions, has no effect on environmental quality but reallocates resources among firms toward the most productive ones which has an impact on firms' entry and exit decisions, the mass of firms, and the composition of the market. Firm heterogeneity magnifies these economic effects of changes in the initial allocation of allowances. The paper provides a decomposition of the change in aggregate emissions which takes account of the changes at sector level, across the firms within a sector, and at the firm level.     

Optimal pollution permit endowments in markets with endogenous emissions

In a permit market with endogenous emissions, both firms and citizens purchase permits. Presented here are static and dynamic models of pollution permit markets with endogenous emissions. The optimal permit endowments are characterized when the regulator faces uncertainty about damages and uncertainty about the severity of the citizens’ collective action problem. Due to the possibility of learning over time, the regulator issues a larger number of permits in the first period of the dynamic model than in the static model.     

Unintended consequences of price controls: An application to allowance markets

Price controls established in a cap-and-trade allowance market are intended to reduce cost uncertainty by constraining allowance prices between a ceiling and floor; however, they could provide opportunities for strategic actions by firms that would lower government revenue and increase emissions. In particular, when the ceiling price is supported by introducing new allowances into the market, firms could choose to buy allowances at the ceiling price, regardless of the prevailing market price, in order to lower the equilibrium price of all allowances. Those purchases could either be transacted by firms intending to manipulate the market price or be induced through the introduction of inaccurate information about the cost of emissions abatement. Theory and simulations using allowance elasticity estimates for U.S. firms suggest that the manipulation could be profitable under the stylized setting and assumptions evaluated in the paper, although in practice many other conditions will determine its use.     

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.     

Some Welfare Effects of Emission Allowance Trading in a Twice-Regulated Industry

The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments establish a national market in emission allowances to dramatically reduce SO₂, emissions from electric utilities, who already face economic regulation. Regulatory treatment of allowances will affect the new market. We present simulation results for a simple industry in which two electric utilities face a common Averch-Johnson regulatory constraint and an emissions constraint. In this model the performance of the allowance market depends importantly upon the rate-making treatment of compliance assets by utility regulators. Compared to a command and control scheme, the allowance market substantially reduces the cost of achieving a given environmental standard.     

Tax versus emissions trading scheme in the long run

In this paper we compare the performance of emission taxes and tradable permits under free market entry when firms face idiosyncratic ex ante cost uncertainty. We show that under auctioned permits insufficient entry occurs, while under a linear emission tax scheme, depending on parameters, market entry can be either excessive or insufficient. Our long-run analysis thus contrasts with Spulber׳s (1985) equivalence result and also modifies Weitzman׳s result in favor of an ETS in that the superiority of a tax over an ETS is not guaranteed, even when the Weitzman condition favors a tax. We also show that an ETS is superior to a tax scheme when the entry cost is low and the magnitude of uncertainty/asymmetric information and the size of the output market are large.     

Procrastinating reform: The impact of the market stability reserve on the EU ETS

We study the impact of the market stability reserve (MSR) on price and emission paths of the EU ETS. From 2019 onwards, the MSR will adjust the number of allowances auctioned as a function of the size of the surplus, i.e. in times of a large surplus it shifts the issue date of allowances into the future. In a perfectly competitive allowance market the MSR only affects price and emission paths if the baseline equilibrium becomes unfeasible. If the MSR is binding, prices increase in the short run but drop in the medium run relative to the baseline. The MSR increases price variability if uncertainty over future allowance demand is resolved while there is a surplus. The long run cap is unaffected by both the MSR and overlapping climate policies. This contrasts the EU׳s objectives of improving the resilience of the EU ETS and increasing synergies with overlapping climate policies.     

A laboratory study of auctions for reducing non-point source pollution

Non-point source pollution, such as nutrient runoff to waterways from agricultural production, is an environmental problem that typically involves asymmetric information. Land use changes to reduce pollution incur opportunity costs that are privately known to landholders, but these changes provide environmental benefits that may be more accurately estimated by regulators. This paper reports a testbed laboratory experiment in which landholder/sellers in sealed-offer auctions compete to obtain part of a fixed budget allocated by the regulator to subsidize abatement. In one treatment the regulator reveals to landholders the environmental benefits estimated for their projects, and in another treatment the regulator conceals the potential projects’ “environmental quality.” The results show that sellers’ offers misrepresent their costs more for high-quality projects when quality is revealed, so total abatement is lower and seller profits are higher when landholders know their projects’ environmental benefits. This suggests that concealing this information may improve regulatory efficiency.     

Further Results on Permit Markets with Market Power and Cheating

This paper examines a market for pollution permits in which one firm has market power and one or more firms is noncompliant. I show that the firm with market power may choose to hold more permits than it needs, effectively retiring permits from the market. I also show that some noncompliance may be socially desirable because it can mitigate the distortion caused by market power. Similarly, some degree of market power may be socially desirable because it can, in turn, mitigate the distortion caused by noncompliance.     

Sellers' Hedging Incentives at EPA's Emission Trading Auction

Cason (1993, J. Environ. Econom. Management25, 177–195, doi:10.1006/jeem 1993.1041) argued that the auction which the EPA used in order to start the market for sulfur allowances may reduce the efficiency of the market since it gives sellers an incentive to understate their valuation. In this paper we show that the sellers' incentives are even more perverse than Cason suggested when we take into account that sellers can also submit a bid. We show that sellers have an incentive to set their asking price equal to 0 while simultaneously hedging their bets by submitting a positive bid.     

Growth, environment and innovation—a model with production vintages and environmentally oriented research

I develop an innovative environmental new growth model driven by researchers striving for monopoly profits. Skilled labour is allocated between production vintages and two forms of research, ordinary and environmentally oriented. The intermediate sector includes fixed costs and decreasing returns, limiting the number of vintages used. I solve for planner's, laissez-faire, and regulator's solutions, and examine welfare implications and the various distortions in the model (monopoly power, knowledge spillovers, business stealing, environmental externalities). A regulator may wish: (i) to encourage environmentally oriented research; (ii) to concentrate production labour on recent (cleaner) vintages; (iii) to switch labour from production to research. An environmental sales tax may under some circumstances achieve all three—such taxes not only give incentives to reduce pollution, but also shift profits from old vintages to new, thus raising incentives to come up with newer (cleaner) vintages. An environmental tax may even lead to an increase in the rate of production growth.     

Thin versus Thick CO2 Market

The idea that trading is more costly the thinner the market is is common in most studies of market exchange with frictions. Surprisingly, this element is lacking from previous attempts to allow for frictions in pollution permit markets. This paper considers a CO₂ cap-and-trade model where trading costs develop endogenously as a function of the market size. The pre-trade allocation of permits determines whether the market size can be strongly influenced by expectations that have a role because of adjustment costs. The pre-trade allocation also sets preconditions for endogenously vanishing trading costs and thus has nonstandard effects on long-run trading levels and market allocations.     

The effects on welfare of the imposition of individual transferable quotas on a heterogeneous fishing fleet

This paper examines the determination of effort levels, the rental price of quotas and the number of participants in a fishery managed with a total allowable catch and individual transferable quotas. How these variables change is determined for three phases of the management process. Potential participants in the fishery are assumed to be heterogeneous in their catching capabilities so that almost all active fishers earn positive net profits from fishing activities. It is shown that these quasirents are reduced during any of the management phases considered here. The impact of free allocations of permanent quota rights on fishers’ welfare is also considered. This may increase the welfare of all fishers if the allocation is based on catch history. However, an example is provided where the welfare of some highliners is reduced when the allocation is based on effort history.     

Carbon leakage: Grandfathering as an incentive device to avert firm relocation

Emission allowances are sometimes distributed for free in an early phase of a cap-and-trade scheme to reduce adverse effects on the profitability of firms. This paper investigates whether grandfathering can also be used to avert the relocation of firms to countries with lower carbon prices. We show that under certain conditions, relocation can be averted in the long run, even if the grandfathering scheme is phased out over time and immediate relocation is profitable in its absence. This requires that the permit price triggers sufficient investments into low-carbon technologies or abatement capital that create a lock-in effect which makes relocation unprofitable.     

Oligopoly meets oligopsony: The case of permits

This paper derives market equilibria (in demand functions and in bidding strategies) between oligopolists and oligopsonists in a market with intermediates and no competition in final markets. To the best of my knowledge, this theme has not been explored, despite two observations: Firstly, the commonly applied framework of non-competitive and competitive fringe firms has implausible properties for the limit of purely strategic players. Secondly, real world cases correspond at least potentially to such strategic interactions, e.g., non-competitive players selling and buying permits (CO₂ and SO₂). The major implications are that these non-competitive markets are characterized by a kind of double marginalization (on the demand and the supply side) resulting in too little trade and wrong price signals.     

Green markets, eco-certification, and equilibrium fraud

Consumers voluntarily pay significant price premiums to acquire unobservable environmental attributes in green markets. This paper considers the performance of eco-certification policy under circumstances where consumers cannot discern environmental attributes in goods, but are able to form rational expectations regarding the extent of illicit activities in the green market. The main results are: (i) fraud is less prevalent in green markets when entry barriers limit the number of firms; (ii) conventional environmental policies on polluting techniques increase the incidence of fraud, and can even preclude the use of non-polluting techniques which would otherwise emerge in green markets; (iii) voluntary eco-certification policies can decrease fraud, increase output, and raise profits per firm; and (iv) in cases where the socially optimal resource allocation can be supported, the optimal policy involves negative unit certification fees, positive fixed certification fees and is revenue-generating for the certifying agent.     

Terminating links between emission trading programs

Links between emission trading programs are not immutable, as highlighted by New Jersey׳s exit from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in 2011. This raises the question of what to do with existing permits that are banked for future use—choices that have consequences for market behavior in advance of, or upon speculation about, delinking. We consider two delinking policies. One differentiates banked permits by origin, the other treats banked permits the same. We describe the price behavior and relative cost-effectiveness of each policy. Treating permits differently generally leads to higher costs, and may lead to price divergence, even with only speculation about delinking.     

A Conceptual Analysis of the Application of Tradable Permits to Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: Tradable permits have been applied in many areas of environmental policy and may be a response to increasing calls for flexible conservation instruments that successfully conserve biodiversity while allowing for economic development. The idea behind applying tradable permits to conservation is that developers wishing to turn land to economic purposes, thereby destroying valuable habitat, may only do so if they submit a permit to the conservation agency showing that habitat of at least the equivalent ecological value is restored elsewhere. The developer himself does not need to carry out the restoration, but may buy a permit from a third party, thus allowing a market to emerge. Nevertheless, the application of tradable permits to biodiversity conservation is a complex issue because destroyed and restored habitats are likely to differ. There may be various trade‐offs between the ecological requirements that destroyed and restored habitats be as similar as possible, and the need for a certain level of market activity to have a functioning trading system. The success of tradable permits as an instrument for reconciling the conflicts between economic development and conservation depends on the existence of certain economic, institutional, and ecological preconditions, for example, a functioning institutional framework, sufficient expert knowledge, and adequate monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.     

Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control

The process of technological change in pollution control is broken into three basic steps: innovation, diffusion, and optimal agency response. Firm incentives to promote these steps are then examined under five regulatory regimes: direct controls, emission subsidies, emission taxes, free marketable permits, and auctioned marketable permits. On a relative basis, emission taxes and auctioned permits provide the highest firm incentives to promote technological change; at times, free permits generate lower incentives. Direct controls, which are common regulatory tools, usually provide the lowest relative firm incentives to promote technological change.