Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

“Monetary” rules for a linked system of offset credits

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three dominant issues have historically plagued climate negotiations: How to bypass issues of sovereignty, generate sufficient climate finance, and establish an agreement that is inclusive of the current major polluters. These issues are prevalent within the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol, and the CDM has provided policy makers with a useful starting point to understanding how offset credits can be utilised within a post-Kyoto framework. The primary aim of this research is to investigate how project-based offset credits generated by states would interact within a linked framework using monetary rules and exchange rates. The examination of a linked system, specifically, was owing to the structure of the proposed agreement to be finalised in Paris at COP 21 where nationally determined contributions would be submitted by each state, allowing for the possibility of linked domestic carbon market mechanisms. The certified emission reduction credits of the CDM were used as a model to investigate the trade of offset credits within a linked system which act as a unique climate currency of each domestic offset credit mechanism. These offset credits could be earned through the implementation of domestic projects or projects hosted in other states. From this research, we conclude that fixed exchange rates are more stable than flexible exchange rates in a climate currency framework. Fixed exchange rates reduce losses of capital (owing to uncertainty in the markets) and the prominence of asymmetric spatial price transmission associated with fiat offset credit prices. To encourage co-operation between developing and developed countries, it is recommended that a combination of currency area theory and trade blocs be implemented as opposed to a currency union. Currency areas are the most viable option as they maintain that the domestic offset credit mechanism is under the control of the state and retains a level of stability as individual state offset credit prices are fixed to the same price. Even though this research forms the basis for a new climate policy architecture, the overall effectiveness of the policy will be determined by the selection of appropriate discount schemes, increased participation and agreement by states, and most significantly, political will.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BOCM:

Bilateral offset credit mechanism

BRICS:

Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa

CDM:

Clean Development Mechanism

CERs:

Certified Emission Reductions

COP:

Conference of Parties

DOEs:

Designated Operation Entities

DRC:

Democratic Republic of Congo

ERM:

Exchange Rate Mechanism

ERT:

Emission Reduction Target

EU:

European Union

EU-ETS:

European Union Emissions Trading System

G7:

Group of 7

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

IMF:

International Monetary Fund

INDC:

Intended Nationally Determined Contributions

KP:

Kyoto Protocol

LDCs:

Least developing countries

MOP:

Meeting of Parties

OCM:

Offset Credit Mechanism

OC:

Offset credit

REDD+:

Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation

RGGI:

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

SDR:

Special Drawing Rights

SIDS:

Small Island Developing States

UNFCCC:

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

USA:

United States of America

WEF:

World Economic Forum

WTO:

World Trade Organisation

References

  • Abdulai, A. (2000). Spatial price transmission and asymmetry in the Ghanaian maize market. Journal of Development Economics, 63, 327–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldy, J. E., Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. N. (2003). Thirteen plus one: A comparison of global climate policy architectures. Climate Policy, 3, 373–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, S., Haug, C., Van Asselt, H., Gupta, J., & SaΪdi, R. (2011). The future of the CDM.Same same, but differentiated? Climate Policy, 11, 752–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R., & Bygrave, S. (2002). Towards international emissions trading: Design implications for linkages, CATEP workshop on global trading. Germany: Kiel Institute for World Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati, J., & Panagariya, A. (1996). The theory of preferential trade agreements: History evolution and current trends. The American Economic Review, 86, 82–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodansky, D., Hoedl, S., Metcalf, G.E., & Stavins, R.N., (2014). Facilitating linkage of heterogeneous regional, national, and sub-national climate policies through a future international agreement. Discussion Paper, Harvard Project on Climate Agreements.

  • Bonpasse, M. (2006). The single global currency: Common cents for the world (p. 425). Newcastle, M.E.: Single Global Currency Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, M. D. (1993). The Bretton Woods international monetary system: A historical overview. In M. D. Bordo & B. Eichengreen (Eds.), A retrospective on the Bretton Woods system: Lessons for international monetary reform (pp. 3–108). Chicago, I.L.: University of Chicago Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, A. (2011). Raising climate finance to support developing country action: Some economic considerations. Climate Policy, 11, 1020–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, J. (2008). Carbon: commodity or currency-the case for an international carbon market based on the currency model. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 32, 571–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castellacci, F. (2009). How does competition affect the relationship between innovation and productivity? Estimation of a CDM model for Norway. Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Castro, P., & Michaelowa, A. (2010). The impact of discounting emission credits on the competitiveness of different CDM host countries. Ecological Economics, 70, 34–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CDM policy dialogue. (2012). Climate change, carbon markets and the CDM: A call to action. Report of the High-Level Panel on the CDM Policy Dialogue.

  • Chen, H., Letmathe, P., & Soderstrom, N. (2012). Financial analysis used in clean development mechanisms: fact or fiction?. Boulder: University of Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chotalia, P. (2013). Carbon credit-currency of 21st century. Voice of Research, 2, 58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, R. K. (2007). A CER discounting scheme could save climate change regime after 2012. Climate Policy, 7, 171–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Convery, F., Ellerman, D., & De Perthuis, C. (2008). The European carbon market in action: Lessons from the first trading period Report No. 162. Cambridge, M.A.: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sépibus, J., (2009). The environmental integrity of the CDM mechanism–A legal analysis of its institutional and procedural shortcomings. Working paper 24. Bern: NCCR (Swiss National Centre of Compliance in Research).

  • De Sépibus, J. (2010). Linking the EU emission trading scheme to JI, CDM and post-2012 international offsets. In L. Lakshmi (Ed.), Clean development mechanism and law (pp. 49–84). Hyderabad: Icfai University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edenhofer, O., Flachsland, C., & Marschinski, R. (2007). Towards a global CO2 Market: An economic analysis. Potsdam: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichengreen, B., & Irwin, D. A. (1995). Trade blocs, currency blocs and the reorientation of world trade in the 1930s. Journal of International Economics, 38, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellerman, D. (2010). The EU emission trading scheme: A prototype global system? Post-Kyoto international climate policy: Implementing architectures for agreement Report No. 170. MIT: Cambridge, M.A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, J., & Tirpak, D. (2006). Linking GHG emission trading systems and markets. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, J., Winkler, H., Morlot, J. C., & Gagnon-Lebrun, F. (2007). CDM: Taking stock and looking forward. Energy Policy, 35, 15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EU-ETS. (2014). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm

  • Evans-Pritchard, A. (2009). The G20 moves the world a step closer to a global currency. London: The Telegraph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figueres, C., Haites, E., & Hoyt, E. (2005). Programmatic CDM project activities: Eligibility, methodological requirements and implementation. Carbon Finance Business Unit of the World Bank: Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figueres, C., & Streck, C. (2009). The evolution of the CDM in a post-2012 climate agreement. The Journal of Environment and Development, 18, 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francois, M., & Hamaide, B. (2011). Certified emission reductions weights for improved CDM projects. Environmental Policy and Governance, 21, 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel, J. A. (2006). On the Reminbi: The choice between adjustment under a fixed exchange rate and adjustment under a flexible rate. CESifo Economic Studies, 52, 246–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel, J. A., & Rose, A. K. (1996a). Currency crashes in emerging markets: An empirical treatment. Journal of International Economics, 41, 351–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankel, J. A., & Rose, A. K. (1996b). Economic structure and the decision to adopt a common currency. Berkeley, CA: Center for International and Development Economics Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furceri, D. (2007). From currency unions to a world currency: A possibility? International Journal of Applied Economics, 4, 17–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, R., & Rose, A. K. (2002). Does a currency union affect trade? The time-series evidence. European Economic Review, 46, 1125–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, R. W., & Guillory, J. A. (2007). Green currency. International Finance Law Review, 26, 18–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, J. (2008). Post 2012: CDMs role in the climate negotiations. Policy Note for the European Parliament. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.

  • Haites, E. (2003). Harmonisation between national and international tradeable permit schemes CATEP synthesis paper. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haites, E., & Mullins, F. (2001). Linking domestic and industry greenhouse gas emission trading systems. Margee Consultants.

  • Hepburn, C. (2007). Carbon trading: A review of the Kyoto mechanisms. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32, 375–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogzaad, J., Korthuis, A., & Streck, C. (2008). A call to reform. Carbon Finance, 16–17.

  • Howland, J. (2009). Not all carbon credits are created equal: The constitutional and the cost of regional cap- and-trade market linkage. UCLA Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, 27, 413–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howse, R., & Eliason, A. (2009). Carbon trading and the CDM in WTO law. In R. B. Stewart, B. Kingsbury, & B. Rudyk (Eds.), Climate finance: Strategies for climate change and global development (pp. 254–258). New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, J., Ranson, M., & Stavins, R. N. (2009). Linking tradable permit systems: A key element of emerging international climate policy architecture. Ecology Law Quarterly, 36, 789–808.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, J., & Stavins, R. (2007). Linking tradable permit systems for greenhouse gas emissions: Opportunities, implications, and challenges. Geneva: International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, H., & Tuerk, A. (2008). Emerging Japanese emissions trading schemes and prospects for linking. Cambridge, UK: Climate Strategies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, G. (2011). The future of the European emission trading system and the clean development mechanism in a post-Kyoto world. Energy Economics, 33, 687–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langrock, T., & Sterk, W. (2005). The developing market for CERs: Current status and challenges ahead. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, 2, 101–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le, H., & Delbosc, A. (2012). Japan’s bilateral offset credit mechanism: A bilateral solution to a global issue. Climate Brief: CDC Climat Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy-Yeyati, E., & Sturzenegger, F. (2003). To float or to fix: Evidence on the impact of exchange rate regimes on growth. The American Economic Review, 93, 1173–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mace, M. J., Millar, I., Schwarte, C., Anderson, J., Broekhoff, D., Bradley, R., et al. (2008). Analysis of the legal and organisational issues arising in linking the EU emissions trading scheme to other existing and emerging emissions trading schemes. London, Brussels, Washington, D.C.: Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development, Institute for European Environmental Policy, World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcu, A. (2014). Networked Carbon Markets in the context of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. Brussels: CEPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P. (1995). Free-riding, convergence and two-speed monetary unification in Europe. European Economic Review, 39, 1345–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKibbin, W. J., Morris, A., & Wilcoxen, P. J. (2008). Expecting the unexpected: Macroeconomic volatility and climate policy, Discussion paper 08-16. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, BelferCenter for Science and International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinnon, R. I. (1982). Currency substitution and instability in the world dollar standard. The American Economic Review, 72, 320–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina, V., Pardo, A., & Pascual, R. (2011). Intraday price dynamics between EUAs and CERs in the European carbon futures market. Spain: University of Valencia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehling, M., & Haites, E. (2009). Mechanisms for linking emissions trading schemes. Climate Policy, 9, 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michaelowa, A. (2011). The future of the CDM and the new market mechanisms. Zurich: University of Zurich.

  • Michaelowa, A., & Purohit, P. (2007). Additionality determination of Indian projects: Can Indian CDM project developers outwit the CDM executive board?. Zurich: Institute for Political Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. A. (1978). Currency substitution, flexible exchange rates, and monetary independence. The American Economic Review, 68, 428–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (1961). A theory of optimum currency areas. The American Economic Review, 51, 657–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (1997). Currency areas, common currencies, and EMU. The American Economic Review, 87, 214–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (2000). Currency areas, exchange rate systems and international monetary reform. Journal of Applied Economics, 3, 217–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (2002). Monetary unions and the problem of sovereignty. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 579, 123–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (2003). The international monetary system and the case for a world currency, Distinguished Lecture Series n.12. Warsaw: Leon Koźmiński Academy of Entrepreneurship and Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (2005). The case for a world currency. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27, 465–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mundell, R. A. (2012). The case for a world currency. Journal of Policy Modeling, 34, 568–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Najam, A., Huq, S., & Sokona, Y. (2003). Climate negotiations beyond Kyoto: Developing countries concerns and interests. Climate Policy, 3, 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazifi, F. (2010). The price impacts of linking the EU ETS to the CDM. Australia: Macquarie University.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’ Sullivan, R. (2007). CERSPA: A new template agreement for the sale and purchase of certified emission reductions (CERs). Environmental Liability, 15, 120–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okubo, Y., Hayashi, D., & Michaelowa, A. (2011). NAMA crediting: How to assess offsets from and additionality of policy-based mitigation actions in developing countries. Greenhouse Gas Measurement and Management, 1, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olmstead, S. M., & Stavins, R. N. (2006). An international policy architecture for the post-Kyoto era. The American Economic Review, 96, 35–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olmstead, S. M., & Stavins, R. N. (2012). Three key elements of a post-2012 international climate policy architecture. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 6, 65–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parnphumeesup, P., & Kerr, S. A. (2011). Classifying carbon credit buyers according to their attitudes towards and involvement in CDM sustainability labels. Energy Policy, 39, 6271–6279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partridge, I., & Gamkhar, S., (2010). The role of the clean development mechanism in a post Kyoto climate agreement: Effective participation by China and India. Association for Environmental and Resource Economists Workshop on Energy and Environment. Washington D.C.: Resources for the Future.

  • Paulsson, E. (2009). A review of the CDM literature: from fine-tuning to critical scrutiny? International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics, 9, 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, S. (2000). Prices rise faster than they fall. Journal of Political Economy, 108, 466–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdan, S., & Azapagic, A. (2011). Carbon trading: Current schemes and future developments. Energy Policy, 39, 6040–6054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, S., & Klepper, G. (2010). The Future of ETS and CDM in a post-Kyoto World. Germany: Econstor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranson, M., & Stavins, R.N., (2012). Post-Durban climate policy architecture based on linkage of cap-and- trade systems, No. w18140. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Ranson, M., & Stavins, R.N., (2014). Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: Learning from experience, No. w19824. National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Rogoff, K. (2001). Why not a global currency? The American Economic Review, 91, 243–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A. K., & Van Wincoop, E. (2001). National money as a barrier to international trade: The real case for currency union. The American Economic Review, 91, 386–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sardoni, C., & Wray, L. R. (2007). Fixed and flexible exchange rates and currency sovereignty. Annandale-on-Hudson, N.Y: The Levy Economics Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatz, A. (2008). Discounting the clean development mechanism. George Town International Environmental Law Review, 20, 703–742.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, L. (2008). A clean development mechanism (CDM) with atmospheric benefits for a post-2012 climate regime. International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics, 9, 95–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulmeister, S. (2000). Globalisation without global money: The double role of the dollar as national currency and world currency. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 22, 365–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serra, T., Gil, J. M., & Goodwin, B. K. (2006). Local polynomial fitting and spatial price relationships: Price transmission in EU pork markets. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 33, 415–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shambaugh, J. C. (2004). The effect of fixed exchange rates on monetary policy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 301–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shopley, J., (2013). COP19 Warsaw picks low-hanging fruit and leaves a lot to do. (http://www.carbonneutral.com/resource-hub/company-blog/cop19-warsaw)

  • Sovacool, B. K. (2011). The policy challenges of tradable credits: A critical review of eight markets. Energy Policy, 39, 575–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, U., Oleschak, R., Suter, S., Forrister, D., & Youngman, R. (2006). Linking Domestic Emissions Trading Schemes to the EU ETS. Berne, Switzerland: IEA/OECD Information Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavins, R. N., & Jaffe, J. (2007). Linking tradable permit systems for greenhouse gas emissions: Opportunities, implications, and challenges. Geneva: International Emissions Trading Association (IETA).

  • Sterk, W., Braun, M., Haug, C., Korytarova, K., & Scholten, A. (2006). Ready to link up? Implications of design differences for linking emissions trading schemes. Germany: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streck, C., & Chagas, T. B. (2007). The future of CDM in a post-Kyoto world. Carbon and Climate Law Review, 1, 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streck, C., & Lin, J. (2008). Making markets work: A review of CDM performance and the need for reform. European Journal of International Law, 19, 409–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutter, C., & Parreño, J. C. (2007). Does the current clean development mechanism (CDM) deliver its sustainable development claim? An analysis of officially registered CDM projects. Climate Change, 84, 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. B. (2001). The role of the exchange rate in monetary-policy rules. The American Economic Review, 91, 263–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tornell, A., & Velasco, A. (2000). Fixed versus flexible exchange rates: Which provides more fiscal discipline? Journal of Monetary Economics, 45, 399–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuerk, A., Mehling, M., Flachsland, C., & Sterk, W. (2009). Linking carbon markets: Concepts, case studies and pathways. Climate Policy, 9, 341–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2007). The Bali Road Map,FCCC/CP/2007/6/Add.1, decision 1/CP. 13. http://unfccc.int/key_steps/bali_road_map/items/6072.php

  • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2011). The Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, FCCC/CP/2011/9/Add.1, decision 1/CP. 17. http://unfccc.int/resources/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a01.pdf

  • United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2014). http://unfccc.int/2860.php

  • United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2015a). INDCs as communicated by Parties. http://www4.unfccc.int/submission/indc/SubmissionPages/submissions/aspx

  • United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2015b). Framework for Various Approaches. http://www.unfccc.int/cooperation_support/market_and_non- market_mechanisms/items/7709.php

  • Vasa, A. (2010). Implementing CDM limits in the EU ETS: A law and economics approach. Berlin: German Institute for Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasa, A., & Neuhoff, K. (2011). The role of CDM post-2012 CPI Report. Berlin: Climate Policy Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venter, O., & Koh, L. P. (2012). Reducing emissions for deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+): Game changer or just another quick fix? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1249, 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, D. G., & Cullenward, D. (2007). Making carbon markets work. Scientific American, 297, 70–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, R., Arens, C., Mersmann, F., Ott, H. E., & Sterk, W. (2008). The Bali roadmap for global climate policy—new horizons and old pitfalls. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, 5, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westskog, H. (2002). Why should emissions trading be restricted? Climate Policy, 2, 97–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2008). State and trends of the carbon market. The World Bank: Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wolfson College, University of Cambridge, Barton Road, Cambridge, CB3 9BB, UK

    Kamleshan Pillay

  2. Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Jorge E. Viñuales

Authors
  1. Kamleshan Pillay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jorge E. Viñuales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kamleshan Pillay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pillay, K., Viñuales, J.E. “Monetary” rules for a linked system of offset credits. Int Environ Agreements 16, 933–951 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9312-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-015-9312-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation