Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 661–691 | Cite as

Windfall Profits Under Pollution Permits and Output-Based Allocation

Article
  • 153 Downloads

Abstract

This paper analyzes the implementation of pollution permits. It focuses on the distributional impacts linked with the stringency of output-based allocation when two sectors are covered by the market for permits and the total cap is held constant. A new type of profit increase in sectors that are not exposed to international competition, when energy-intensive trade-exposed (EITE) sectors are granted output-based allocations, is demonstrated theoretically. The paper also illustrates a profit increase in the electricity sector in a possible fourth phase of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme, in which output-based allocation will be granted to EITE sectors, compared with the case in which all permits are auctioned.

Keywords

Tradable permits Oligopoly markets Output-based allocation European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 

JEL Classification

F18 H2 Q5 

References

  1. Böhringer C, Lange A (2005) Economics implication of alternative allocation schemes for emission allowances. Scand J Econ 107(3):563–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borkent B, Gilbert A, Klaassen E, Neelis M, Blok K (2014) Dynamic allocation for the EU emissions trading system. Enabling sustainable growth. EcofysGoogle Scholar
  3. Boston Consulting Group (2012) Key arguments justifying the European cement industry’s application for state aid to balance the offshoring risk caused by the increased of electricity prices due to EU-ETS, report, January 2012Google Scholar
  4. Christin C, Nicolaï J.-Ph, Pouyet J (2013) Pollution permits, abatement technologies and imperfect competition. Economics working paper series of CER-ETH—Center of Economic Research at ETH Zurich, Working paper 13/186, November 2013Google Scholar
  5. Demailly D, Quirion P (2006) CO2 abatement, competitiveness and leakage in the European Cement Industry under the EU ETS: grandfathering versus output-based allocation. Clim Policy 6:93–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Demailly D, Quirion P (2008) Changing the allocation rules in the EU ETS: impact on competitiveness and economic efficiency, FEEM working paper no. 89.2008Google Scholar
  7. Demailly D, Quirion P (2008) Concilier compétitivité industrielle et politique climatique : faut-il distribuer les quotas de CO2 en fonction de la production ou bien les ajuster aux frontières? La revue èconomique 59(3):497–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fabra N, Reguant M (2014) Pass-Through of Emissions Costs in Electricity Markets. American Economic Review 104(9):2872–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fell H, Hintermann B, Vollebergh H (2015) Carbon content of electricity futures in Phase II of the EU ETS. Energy J 36(4):61–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fischer C (2011) Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues. Resour Energy Econ 33(1):212–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fowlie M, Reguant M, Ryan SP (2016) Market-based emissions regulation and industry dynamics. J Political Econ 124(1):249–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gersbach H, Requate T (2004) Emission Taxes and the Design of Refunding Schemes. Journal of Public Economics 88(3–4):713–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grubb M, Neuhoff K (2006) Allocation and competitiveness in the EU emissions trading scheme: policy overview. Clim Policy 6:7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hepburn C, Quah J, Ritz R (2013) Emissions trading with profit-neutral permit allocations. J Pub Econ 98:85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hintermann B (2011) Market power, permit allocation and efficiency in emission permit markets. Environ Resour Econ 49(3):327–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hintermann B (2015) Market power in emission permit markets: theory and evidence from the EU ETS. Environ Resour Econ 1–24. doi: 10.1007/s10640-015-9939-4
  17. Hintermann B (2016) Pass-through of CO2 emission costs to hourly electricity prices in Germany. J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 3(4):857–891Google Scholar
  18. Hirth L, Ueckerdt F (2013) Redistribution effects of energy and climate policy: The electricity market. Energy Policy 62:934–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kimmel S (1992) Effects of cost changes on oligopolists’ profits. J Ind Econ 40(4):441–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kettner C, Köppl A, Schleicher S, Thenius G (2007) Stringency and distribution in the EU emissions trading scheme—The 2005 evidence. WIFO, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  21. Meunier G, Ponssard JP (2012) A sectoral approach balancing efficiency and equity. Environ Resour Econ 53:533–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ministere d’Economie, des Finances et de l’Industrie (2003) Coûts de référence de la production électrique, DGEMP-DIDEMEGoogle Scholar
  23. Monjon S, Quirion P (2011) Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: border adjustment or output-based allocation? Ecol Econ 70:1957–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Neuhoff K, Keats M, Sato M (2006) Allocation, incentives and distortions: the impact of EU ETS emissions allowance allocations to the electricity sector. Clim Policy 6(1):73–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quirion P (2010) Competitiveness and leakage. In: Climate change policies—global challenges and future prospects. University of Vigo, Spain: Emilio Cerdá, pp 77–94Google Scholar
  26. Reinaud J (2004) Industrial competitiveness under the European Union emissions trading scheme. International Energy Agency information paperGoogle Scholar
  27. Requate T (2005) Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments: a survey. Ecol Econ 54:175–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Requate T (2006) Environmental policy under imperfect competition. In: Folmer H, Tietenberg, T (eds) The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics 2006/2007, Edward Elgar, pp 120–208Google Scholar
  29. Seade J (1985) Profitable cost increases and the shifting of taxation. Unpublished University of Warwick economic research paperGoogle Scholar
  30. Sijm J, Neuhoff K, Chen Y (2006) CO2 cost pass-through and windfall profits in the power sector. Clim Policy 6(1):49–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Smale R, Hartley M, Hepburn C, Ward J, Grubb M (2006) The impact of CO2 emissions trading on firm profits and market prices. Clim Policy 6(1):29–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Integrative Risk Management and EconomicsETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Centre d’Economie de la SorbonneUniversité Paris I Panthéon SorbonneParis Cedex 13France
  3. 3.Departamento de Ingeniería IndustrialUniversidad de Santiago de ChileSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations