Abstract
This article provides an exploratory evaluation of the extent to which statutorily unallocated revenues under California’s cap-and-trade (“CT”) program could be securitized to lever an investment trust fund, referenced as the California Climate Adaptation Trust Fund (“CCA Fund”). The article seeks to address two research questions. First, how much money could the state raise from securitizing CT revenue, if at all? Second, what are the challenges and uncertainties to operating a levered fund? Based on a modified portfolio model initially capitalized by CT revenue, this article evaluates not only the size and potential performance of a CCA Fund, but also the range of challenges and opportunities facing the development of a portfolio of products advanced in the name of financing climate adaptation investments. The model results are presented through various expert-derived scenarios that are framed by various political drivers and market parameters. While the totality of resources needed to adapt public infrastructure and programs to climate change is unknown, local economic extrapolations of climate change impacts are increasingly well understood across sectors—with the California Climate Assessment putting the annual price tag at $50 billion by 2050. This article contributes to a current legislative and policy debates that are seeking to develop methods for understanding and exploring the range of opportunities and challenges associated with state-sponsored adaptation trust funds.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Auditor of the State of California (ASC) (2018). California high-speed rail authority: its flawed decision making and poor contract management have contributed to billions in cost overruns and delays in the system’s construction. Report 2018-108. Sacramento: Auditor of the State of California
Barrett S (2013) Local level climate justice? Adaptation finance and vulnerability reduction. Glob Environ Change 23(6):1819–1829
Bedsworth L, Cayan D, Franco G, Fisher L, Ziaja S (2018) 2018 Statewide summary report. California’s fourth climate change assessment. Publication number: SUMCCCA4-2018-013. Sacramento: California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, California Energy Commission, California Public Utilities Commission
Bisaro A, Hinkel J (2018) Mobilizing private finance for coastal adaptation: a literature review. Wiley Interdiscip Rev 9(3):e514. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.514
Bodnar P, Ott C, Edwards R, Hoch S, McGlynn EF, Wagner G (2018) Underwriting 1.5 C: competitive approaches to financing accelerated climate change mitigation. Clim Policy 18(3):368–382
Borenstein S, Bushnell J, Wolak F (2017) California’s cap-and-trade market through 2030: a preliminary supply/demand analysis. Energy Institute, Haas Working Paper #274. Berkeley: University of California, Berkley. http://ei.haas.berkeley.edu/research/papers/WP281.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
Busch C (2018) Technical appendix to blog post “analyzing the likely impact of oversupply on california’s carbon must considers state’s 2030 emissions goal and potential for clean tech breakthroughs.” San Francisco: Energy Innovation Policy & Technology LLC. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Technical-appendix-to-BBB-blog-post-12-January.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2017a) Emission inventory activities. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board. https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/ei.htm. Accessed Apr 2019
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2017b) AB 32 scoping plan. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm. Accessed Apr 2019
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2018a) 2018 California climate investments annual report: cap and trade dollars at work. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auctionproceeds/2018_cci_annual_report.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2018b) Québec-California-Ontario carbon market: a strong example of north American collaboration. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/quebec-california-ontario-carbon-market-strong-example-north-american-collaboration. Accessed Apr 2019
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (2018c). Co-benefit assessment methodology for climate adaptation. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/auctionproceeds/final_adaptation_am.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
California Energy Commission (CEC) (2018). Tracking progress: greenhouse gas emission reductions. Sacramento: California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Reductions.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
Cambou M, Filipović D (2018) Replicating portfolio approach to capital calculation. Finance Stochast 22(1):181–203
Chen C, Hellmann J, Berrang-Ford L, Noble I, Regan P (2018) A global assessment of adaptation investment from the perspectives of equity and efficiency. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 23(1):101–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-016-9731-y
Christophers B (2018) Risk capital: urban political ecology and entanglements of financial and environmental risk in Washington, DC. Environ Planning E. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618770369
Christophers B, Bigger P, Johnson L (2018) Stretching scales? Risk and sociality in climate finance. Environ Planning. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518x18819004
Clark R, Reed J, Sunderland T (2018) Bridging funding gaps for climate and sustainable development: pitfalls, progress and potential of private finance. Land Use Policy 71:335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.013
Crick F, Gannon KE, Diop M, Sow M (2018) Enabling private sector adaptation to climate change in sub-Saharan Africa. Wiley Interdiscip Rev 9(2):e505. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.505
Cullenward D, Burtraw D (2018) Subcommittee report on managing allowance supply. Report of independent emissions market advisory committee. Sacramento: California Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2018/09/f.i-IEMAC_Meeting_Materials_9-21-18__Subcommittee_Report_on_Managing_-Allowance_Supply_9-10-18.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
Dey C, Gibbon J (2018) New development: private finance over public good? Questioning the value of impact bonds. Public Money Manage 38(5):375–378
Donner SD, Kandlikar M, Webber S (2016) Measuring and tracking the flow of climate change adaptation aid to the developing world. Environ Res Lett 11(5):054006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054006
Dowd K (2000) Adjusting for risk: an improved sharpe ratio. Int Rev Econ Finan 9(3):209–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1059-0560(00)00063-0
Glasserman P (2013) Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering, vol 53. Springer, New York
Goetzmann W, Ingersoll J, Spiegel M, Welch I (2007) Portfolio performance manipulation and manipulation-proof performance measures. Rev Financial Stud 20(5):1503–1546
Greenwood R, Seasholes MS, Biery D (2015) The portfolio improvement rule and the CAPM. Harvard Business School, technical note: N9-216-027 (Revised February 2016). Harvard Business School, Cambridge
Huang HH, Kerstein J, Wang C (2018) The impact of climate risk on firm performance and financing choices: an international comparison. J Int Bus Stud 49(5):633–656. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0125-5
Israelsen CL (2005) A refinement to the Sharpe ratio and information ratio. J Asset Manage 5(6):423–427
Ji CJ, Hu YJ, Tang BJ (2018) Research on carbon market price mechanism and influencing factors: a literature review. Nat Hazards 92(2):761–782
Keenan JM (2018a) Regional resilience trust funds: an exploratory analysis for leveraging insurance surcharges. Environ Syst Decis 38(1):118–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-017-9656-3
Keenan JM (2018b) Climate adaptation finance and investment in California. Routledge, London
Klöck C, Molenaers N, Weiler F (2018) Responsibility, capacity, greenness or vulnerability? What explains the levels of climate aid provided by bilateral donors? Environ Politics 27(5):892–916. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1480273
Kotchen MJ, Costello C (2018) Maximizing the impact of climate finance: funding projects or pilot projects? J Environ Econ Manage 92:270–281
Linnenluecke MK, Smith T, McKnight B (2016) Environmental finance: a research agenda for interdisciplinary finance research. Econ Model 59:124–130
Milinski M, Sommerfeld RD, Krambeck HJ, Reed FA, Marotzke J (2008) The collective-risk social dilemma and the prevention of simulated dangerous climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(7):2291–2294
Moser SC, Ekstrom JA, Kim J, Heitsch S (2018) Adaptation finance challenges: characteristic patterns facing California local governments and ways to overcome them. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). Sacramento: CNRA
Mullin M, Smith MD, McNamara DE (2018) Paying to save the beach: effects of local finance decisions on coastal management. Clim Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2191-5
Paterson M, P-Laberge X (2018) Political economies of climate change. Wiley Interdiscip Rev 9(2):e506. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.506
Pathak T, Maskey M, Dahlberg J, Kearns F, Bali K, Zaccaria D (2018) Climate change trends and impacts on California agriculture: a detailed review. Agronomy 8(3):25. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8030025
Pauw WP (2015) Not a panacea: private-sector engagement in adaptation and adaptation finance in developing countries. Clim Policy 15(5):583–603. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2014.953906
Pauw WP, Klein RJ, Vellinga P, Biermann F (2016) Private finance for adaptation: do private realities meet public ambitions? Clim Change 134(4):489–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1539-3
Petek G (2019) 2019–2019 budget: natural resources and environmental projection. California Legislative Analyst’s Office, Sacramento
Pollitt H, Mercure JF (2018) The role of money and the financial sector in energy-economy models used for assessing climate and energy policy. Clim Policy 18(2):184–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1277685
Rodehorst B, Cooper W, Ryder D, Lennon J, Dorney C, Kafalenos R, Hyman R (2018) Using life cycle cost analyses (LCCAs) to evaluate climate change adaptation measures for transportation projects: a Colorado case study. Transportation research board no. 18-04966. Washington, D.C.: National Academies of Sciences
Schatzki T, Stavins RN (2018) Key issues facing California’s GHG cap-and-trade system for 2021–2030. Working paper series: 2018-02. Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business & Government. Cambridge: Harvard Kennedy School of Government
Sharpe WF (1994) The Sharpe ratio. J Portf Manage 21(1):49–58
Star J, Rowland EL, Black ME, Enquist CA, Garfin G, Hoffman CH, Hartmann H, Jacobs KL, Moss RH, Waple AM (2016) Supporting adaptation decisions through scenario planning: enabling the effective use of multiple methods. Clim Risk Manage 13:88–94
Taylor C (2017) The 2017–2018 budget: cap-and-trade. Legislative analyst’s office report #3553. Sacramento: Legislative Analyst’s Office
Teicher HM (2018) Practices and pitfalls of competitive resilience: urban adaptation as real estate firms turn climate risk to competitive advantage. Urban Clim 25:9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2018.04.008
Wang B, Li Y, Wang S, Watada J (2018) A multi-objective portfolio selection model with fuzzy value-at-risk ratio. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(6):3673–3687
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keenan, J.M., Gumber, A. California climate adaptation trust fund: exploring the leveraging of cap-and-trade proceeds. Environ Syst Decis 39, 454–465 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09740-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09740-4