Abstract
AbstractWe examine the planner’s dynamic regulation problem in an emission trading system (ETS) with allowance banking. The planner sets the emissions cap for the next period after the current period allowance market has cleared, but before knowing the next period’s abatement cost realization. This creates a time consistency problem when banking is possible. We examine two policies to overcome the consistency problem: a commitment solution and the Markov perfect solution. We show that the endogenous price floor generated by the banking demand becomes an integral feature of the two policies. Hence, they can be best described as hybrid policies that combine elements from emissions taxes and tradable allowances. This reveals new welfare implications that have an influence on instrument choice in the traditional prices versus quantities setup. We compare the expected welfare outcomes of four different policy instruments: the commitment policy, the Markov policy, a Pigouvian tax, and a no-banking ETS. We show that allowing banking can yield welfare gains compared to tax and quantity regulation, with or without commitment.
Funder
Biotieteiden ja Ympäristön Tutkimuksen Toimikunta
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Economics and Econometrics
Reference52 articles.
1. Barro RJ, Gordon DB (1983) A positive theory of monetary policy in a natural rate model. J Polit Econ 91(4):589–610
2. Basar T, Olsder GJ (1982) Dynamic noncooperative game theory. Academic Press, London
3. Beck U, Kruse-Andersen P (2018) Endogenizing the cap in a cap-and-trade system: assessing the agreement on EU ETS phase 4. De Okonomiske Rads Sekretariatet, Denmark, working paper 2018:2
4. Brunner S, Flachsland C, Marschinski R (2012) Credible commitment in carbon policy. Clim Policy 12(2):255–271
5. Burtraw D, Palmer K, Kahn D (2010) A symmetric safety valve. Energy Policy 38(9):4921–4932
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献