An experimental analysis of compliance in dynamic emissions markets

Two important design elements for emission trading programs are whether and to what extent firms are able to bank emissions permits, and how these programs are to be enforced. In this paper we present results from laboratory emissions markets designed to investigate enforcement and compliance when these markets allow permit banking. Banking is motivated by a decrease in the aggregate permit supply in the middle of multi-period trading sessions. Consistent with theoretical insights, our experiments suggest that high permit violation penalties have little deterrence value in dynamic emissions markets, and that the main challenge of enforcing these programs is to motivate truthful self-reports of emissions.     

An experimental analysis of compliance in dynamic emissions markets

Two important design elements for emission trading programs are whether and to what extent firms are able to bank emissions permits, and how these programs are to be enforced. In this paper we present results from laboratory emissions markets designed to investigate enforcement and compliance when these markets allow permit banking. Banking is motivated by a decrease in the aggregate permit supply in the middle of multi-period trading sessions. Consistent with theoretical insights, our experiments suggest that high permit violation penalties have little deterrence value in dynamic emissions markets, and that the main challenge of enforcing these programs is to motivate truthful self-reports of emissions.     

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.     

Stochastic pollution, costly sanctions, and optimality of emission permit banking

This paper identifies a new economic motive for pollution regulations that allow polluting firms to bank and borrow emission permits over time. When aggregate pollution is stochastic, an intertemporal permit trading regime can provide firms with efficient incentives for pollution abatement without the need for costly government enforcement actions that would otherwise be required.     

Linking permit markets multilaterally

We formally study the determinants, magnitude and distribution of efficiency gains generated in multilateral linkages between permit markets. We provide two novel decomposition results for these gains, characterize individual preferences over linking groups and show that our results are largely unaltered with strategic domestic emissions cap selection or when banking and borrowing are allowed. Using the Paris Agreement pledges and power sector emissions data of five countries which all use or considered using both emissions trading and linking, we quantify the efficiency gains. We find that the computed gains can be sizable and are split roughly equally between effort and risk sharing.     

Emissions Trading with Shares and Coupons when Control over Discharges Is Uncertain

Two important decisions in designing markets for tradable emissions permits are whether to allow banking of permits (coupons) and whether to allow trading in entitlements to future permits (shares). Banking is predicted to reduce price instability when firms trade in a reconciliation market after the quantity of emissions has been determined. Tradable shares are a common feature in proposals for emissions trading in Canada. We conduct a laboratory experiment to investigate how bankable coupons and tradable shares affect efficiency and prices under uncertainty. Cognitive demands on the subjects are reduced by computerized advice on the optimal allocation of coupons across periods and the implied marginal values of coupons and shares. Banking, share trading, and uncertainty conditions are introduced in a complete factorial design with three observations per cell. High efficiencies are observed across all treatments. Uncertainty in the control of emissions leads to substantial price instability when banking is not allowed. Banking virtually eliminates the instability, but reduces the efficiency of the market institution. Share trading reduces trading volumes, increases price stability, and improves efficiency.     

Status of Species Conservation Banking in the United States

Abstract:  Receiving financial gains for protecting habitat may be necessary to proactively protect endangered species in the United States. Species conservation banking, the creation and trading of "credits" that represent biodiversity values on private land, is nearly a decade old. We detail the biological, financial, and political experience of conservation banking in the United States. We contacted agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and bank owners and compiled comprehensive accounts of the experiences of current banks. There are 76 properties identified as conservation banks in the United States, but only 35 of these are established under a conservation banking agreement approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The 35 official conservation banks cumulatively cover 15,987 ha and shelter a range of biodiversity, including more than 22 species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Financial motives drove the establishment of 91% of conservation banks, and the majority of for-profit banks are breaking even or making money. With credit prices ranging from $3,000 to $125,000/0.41 ha (1 acre), banking agreements offer financial incentives that compete with development and provide a business-based argument for conserving habitat. Although the bureaucracy of establishing an agreement with the USFWS was burdensome, 63% of bank owners reported they would set up another agreement given the appropriate opportunity. Increasing information sharing, decreasing the time to establish agreements (currently averaging 2.18 years), and reducing bureaucratic challenges can further increase the amount of private property voluntarily committed to banking. Although many ecological uncertainties remain, conservation banking offers at least a partial solution to the conservation versus development conflict over biodiversity.     

Carbon trading across sources and periods constrained by the Marrakesh Accords

We examine the potential effects on permit prices and abatement costs of four compliance rules governing emissions trade across sources and periods in the Kyoto Protocol: The banking rule that allows excess permits to be used later; the restoration rate rule that penalizes borrowing; the commitment period reserve rule that limits sales; and finally, the suspension rule that restricts borrowing and sales. Our framework is a two-period model where parties may be out of compliance in the Kyoto period, but are assumed to comply at a later time. Under varying assumptions about market power and US participation, we find that the rules may have pronounced effects on individual costs, but overall efficiency is not severely affected.     

Evaluation of a Market in Wetland Credits: Entrepreneurial Wetland Banking in Chicago

Abstract: With the rise of market‐led approaches to environmental policy, compensation for permitted discharge of dredge or fill material into wetlands under Section 404 of the U.S. Clean Water Act has been purchased increasingly from entrepreneurial third‐party providers. The growth of this practice (i.e., entrepreneurial wetland banking) has resolved many challenges associated with wetland compensation. But it has also produced (1) quantifiable temporal loss of wetland ecological functions, (2) spatial redistribution of wetland area, and (3) a degree of regulatory instability that may pose a threat to entrepreneurial compensation as a sustainable component of wetland‐compensation policy. We used achieved compensation ratios, lapse between bank credit sale and the attainment of performance standards, distance between impact and bank site, and changes in bank market area to examine these 3 factors. We analyzed data from a census of all such transactions in the Chicago District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, compiled from site visits, Corps databases, and contacts with consultants and Section 404 permittees. Entrepreneurial banking provided compensation at a lower overall ratio than nonbank forms of compensation. Approximately 60% of bank credits were sold after site‐protection standards were met but before ecological performance standards were met at the bank site. The average distance between bank and impact site was approximately 26 km. The area of markets within which established banks can sell wetland credits has fluctuated considerably over the study period. Comparing these data with similar data for other compensation mechanisms will assist in evaluating banking as an element of conservation policy. Data characterizing the performance of entrepreneurial wetland banks in actual regulatory environments are scarce, even though it is the most established of similar markets that have become instrumental to federal policy in administering several major environmental protection laws.     

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.     

The Economics of Pollution Permit Banking in the Context of Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

This paper presents a model of the collective emission permit banking behavior of electricity-generating units affected by Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. A rigorous treatment of the constraint that pollution permits cannot be borrowed from future allocations is introduced. This approach enables an analysis of the impact of future changes in electricity demand, regulations, and technologies on the present permit price and emissions level. The effect of uncertainty on the banking behavior is also explored.     

Markets and environmental management with a storable pollutant

Lee [J. Environ. Econ. Manag., in press] investigates possibilities where pollutants may be stored for a period of time and later released into the environment when adverse effects are minimal. The treatment and storage of pollutants before their release into the environment is a crucial part of many abatement programs. Surprisingly, emission charges will not induce optimal abatement when storage is possible. This occurs because the firms' response to the dynamic tax is indeterminant. We suggest alternative controls, whereby rights to emit pollutants are sold competitively and demonstrate that markets provide incentives for the optimal generation-storage-emission of pollution by firms. In deriving this result an important difference between markets and taxes is revealed. With markets there is still indeterminacy at the firm level, but the aggregate response of all firms is dictated by market forces that insure pollution is reduced by some desired amount.     

The value of flexibility in conservation financing

Land‐acquisition strategies employed by conservation organizations vary in their flexibility. Conservation‐planning theory largely fails to reflect this by presenting models that are either extremely inflexible—parcel acquisitions are irreversible and budgets are fixed—or extremely flexible—previously acquired parcels can readily be sold. This latter approach, the selling of protected areas, is infeasible or problematic in many situations. We considered the value to conservation organizations of increasing the flexibility of their land‐acquisition strategies through their approach to financing deals. Specifically, we modeled 2 acquisition‐financing methods commonly used by conservation organizations: borrowing and budget carry‐over. Using simulated data, we compared results from these models with those from an inflexible fixed‐budget model and an extremely flexible selling model in which previous acquisitions could be sold to fund new acquisitions. We then examined 3 case studies of how conservation organizations use borrowing and budget carry‐over in practice. Model comparisons showed that borrowing and budget carry‐over always returned considerably higher rewards than the fixed‐budget model. How they performed relative to the selling model depended on the relative conservation value of past acquisitions. Both the models and case studies showed that incorporating flexibility through borrowing or budget carry‐over gives conservation organizations the ability to purchase parcels of higher conservation value than when budgets are fixed without the problems associated with the selling of protected areas.     

Emissions trading systems with cap adjustments

Emissions Trading Systems (ETSs) with fixed caps lack provisions to address systematic imbalances in the supply and demand of permits due to changes in the state of the regulated economy. We propose a mechanism which adjusts the allocation of permits based on the current bank of permits. The mechanism spans the spectrum between a pure quantity instrument and a pure price instrument. We solve the firms׳ emissions control problem and obtain an explicit dependency between the key policy stringency parameter—the adjustment rate—and the firms׳ abatement and trading strategies. We present an analytical tool for selecting the optimal adjustment rate under both risk-neutrality and risk-aversion, which provides an analytical basis for the regulator׳s choice of a responsive ETS policy.     

Firms' and states’ responses to laxer environmental standards

On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced the United States' withdrawal from the Paris agreement on climate change. Despite this decision, American firms continued investing in low-carbon technologies and some states committed to tougher environmental standards. To understand this apparent paradox, this paper studies how a weakening of environmental standards affects the behavior of profit-maximizing firms. It finds that a relaxation of emission standards (i) may increase firms’ incentives to adopt clean technologies, but not to pollute less; (ii) may negatively affect industry profitability if it is perceived as temporary; and, when this is the case, (iii) the unilateral adoption of stricter standards by large states may increase the expected profitability of every firm.     

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.     

On reducing the windfall profits in environmental subsidy programs

Investment subsidies are widely used to induce adoption of new technologies that can lower the (marginal) cost of reducing emissions. To economize on these subsidies, governments would like to distinguish between firms that need to receive a subsidy to adopt a new technology, and firms that would adopt that technology even without subsidies. We show that policies consisting of a menu of emission taxes and investment subsidies can potentially induce firms to self-select.     

The environment as a factor of production

This paper uses firm-level data about electric utilities to develop an empirical model of how electric utilities use and bank SO₂ pollution permits under the Acid Rain Program. The empirical model considers emissions, fuels, and labor as variable inputs with quasi-fixed stocks of permits and capital. Consequently, substitution possibilities between the environment and other production factors can be measured and tested. The results reveal substantial substitution between emissions, permit stocks, capital, fuel, and labor. The empirical findings also indicate that firms bank permits primarily as a hedge against uncertainty and for other firm-specific reasons. Overall, the results suggest that cap-and-trade approaches can reduce the cost of meeting environmental goals by providing a mechanism for addressing regulatory and market risks and by signaling an appropriate price for factor use, especially irreversible capital investments.     

The environment as a factor of production

This paper uses firm-level data about electric utilities to develop an empirical model of how electric utilities use and bank SO₂ pollution permits under the Acid Rain Program. The empirical model considers emissions, fuels, and labor as variable inputs with quasi-fixed stocks of permits and capital. Consequently, substitution possibilities between the environment and other production factors can be measured and tested. The results reveal substantial substitution between emissions, permit stocks, capital, fuel, and labor. The empirical findings also indicate that firms bank permits primarily as a hedge against uncertainty and for other firm-specific reasons. Overall, the results suggest that cap-and-trade approaches can reduce the cost of meeting environmental goals by providing a mechanism for addressing regulatory and market risks and by signaling an appropriate price for factor use, especially irreversible capital investments.     

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.