Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp 551–582 | Cite as

The Impact of the European Emission Trading Scheme on Multiple Measures of Economic Performance

  • Giovanni Marin
  • Marianna Marino
  • Claudia PellegrinEmail author


The European Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) has introduced a price for carbon, thus generating an additional cost for companies that are regulated by the scheme. The objective of this paper is to provide empirical evidence on the effect of the EU ETS on firm-level economic performance. There is a growing body of empirical literature that investigates the effects of the EU ETS on firm economic performance, with mixed results. Differently from the previous literature, we test the effect of the EU ETS on a larger set of indicators of economic performance: employment, average wages, turnover, value added, markup, investment, labour productivity, total factor productivity and ROI. Our results, based on a large panel of European firms, provide a broad picture of the economic impact of the EU ETS in its first and second phases of implementation. Contrarily to the expectations, the EU ETS did not affect economic performance negatively. Results suggest that firms have reacted to the EU ETS by passing-through costs to their customers on the one hand and improving labour productivity on the other hand.


European Emission Trading Scheme Economic performance Propensity score matching Difference-in-differences 

JEL Classification

Q52 Q58 


  1. Abadie A (2005) Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. Rev Econ Stud 72(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abadie A, Imbens GW (2006) Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica 74(1):235–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abrell J, Ndoye Faye A, Zachmann G (2011) Assessing the impact of the EU ETS using firm level data. Bruegel Working PaperGoogle Scholar
  4. Ackerberg D, Caves K, Frazer G (2006) Structural identification of production functions. MPRA Paper No. 38349Google Scholar
  5. Anger N, Oberndorfer U (2008) Firm performance and employment in the EU emissions trading scheme: an empirical assessment for Germany. Energy Policy 36(1):12–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baumol WJ, Oates WE (1988) The theory of environmental policy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Böhringer C, Rosendahl KE (2009) Strategic partitioning of emission allowances under the EU Emission Trading Scheme. Resour Energy Econ 31(3):182–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Calel R, Dechezleprêtre A (2016) Environmental policy and directed technological change: evidence from the European carbon market. Rev Econ Stat 98(1):173–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caliendo M, Kopeinig S (2008) Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. J Econ Surv 22(1):31–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chan HSR, Li S, Zhang F (2013) Firm competitiveness and the European Union emissions trading scheme. Energy Policy 63:1056–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coase RH (1981) The Coase theorem and the empty core: a comment. J Law Econ 24:183–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Commins N, Lyons S, Schiffbauer M, Tol RSJ (2011) Climate policy and corporate behaviour. Energy J 32(4):51–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Convery FJ (2009) Reflections—the emerging literature on emissions trading in Europe. Rev Environ Econ Policy 3(1):121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Loecker J (2011) Recovering markups from production data. Int J Ind Organ 29(3):350–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Loecker J, Warzynski F (2012) Markups and firm-level export status. Am Econ Rev 102:2437–2471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Demailly D, Quirion P (2008) European Emission Trading Scheme and competitiveness: a case study on the iron and steel industry. Energy Econ 30(4):2009–2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hepburn C, Grubb M, Neuhoff K, Matthes F, Tse M (2006) Auctioning of EU ETS phase II allowances: how and why? Clim Policy 6(1):137–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaraite J, Di Maria C (2015) Did the EU ETS make a difference? An empirical assessment using Lithuanian firm-level data. Energy J 37(1):1–23Google Scholar
  19. Koch N, Fuss S, Godefroy G, Edenhofer O (2014) Causes of the EU ETS price drop: recession, CDM, renewable policies or a bit of everything?—new evidence. Energy Policy 2014(73):676–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Markussen P, Svendsen GT (2005) Industry lobbying and the political economy of GHG trade in the European Union. Energy Policy 33(2):245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martin R, Muûls M, Wagner UJ (2016) The impact of the EU ETS on regulated firms: what is the evidence after ten years? Rev Environ Econ Policy 10(1):129–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin R, Muûls M, De Preux LB, Wagner UJ (2014) Industry compensation under relocation risk: a firm-level analysis of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. Am Econ Rev 104(8):2482–2508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Palmer K, Oates WE, Portney PR (1995) Tightening environmental standards: the benefit-cost or the no-cost paradigm? J Econ Perspect 9(4):119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Partnership for Market Readiness, International Carbon Action Partnership (2016) Emission trading in practice. A handbook on design and implementation. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  25. Petrick S, Wagner UJ (2014) The impact of carbon trading on industry: evidence from German manufacturing firms. Working paperGoogle Scholar
  26. Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9(4):97–118Google Scholar
  27. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55Google Scholar
  28. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1985) Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat 39:33–38Google Scholar
  29. Sijm J, Neuhoff K, Chen Y (2006) \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) cost pass-through and windfall profits in the power sector. Clim Policy 6(1):49–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Svendsen GT (2005) Lobbying and \(\text{ CO }_{2}\) trade in the EU. In: Hansjürgens B (ed) Emissions trading for climate policy: US and European perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 150–161Google Scholar
  31. Wagner U, Muûls M, Martin R, Colmer J (2014) The causal effects of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme: evidence from French manufacturing plants. Working paperGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Marin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marianna Marino
    • 3
    • 4
  • Claudia Pellegrin
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsSociety and Politics. University of Urbino ‘Carlo Bo’UrbinoItaly
  2. 2.SEEDSFerraraItaly
  3. 3.Department of Strategy and EntrepreneurshipICN Business School, Nancy/MetzNancyFrance
  4. 4.France Bureau d’Économie Théorique et Appliquée (BETA)Université de LorraineNancyFrance
  5. 5.Chair of Economics and Management of InnovationCollege of Management of Technology (CEMI-CDM), École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations