Feasibility Analysis of a Cap-and-Trade System in Mexico and Implications to Circular Economy

  • José-Luis Cruz-Pastrana
  • María-Laura Franco-García
Part of the Greening of Industry Networks Studies book series (GINS, volume 6)


Market-based instruments, such as the cap-and-trade, have been widely used to address the increase of greenhouse gases (GHG). In line with other geographic regions, Mexico has seen the need to expand the options of market instruments to mitigate the effects of climate change. Simultaneously, there are important reasons to move towards a circular economy model. In this context, this research seeks to answer if it’s feasible to implement a cap-and-trade system in Mexico as part of its climate policy. That said, firstly, it analyses and assesses the cap-and-trade system in Mexico based upon its contextual environment, its potential of implementation and its economic and environmental benefits and costs. Secondly, it highlights the implications of considering circular economy models into a cap-and-trade instrument. Through the use of marginal abatement cost curves (MACC), it was found that the percentage of measures to reduce GHG with negative cost agglomerates 57% of all the measures, which could translate into a benefit for the economy as a whole by almost 1% of GDP by 2020. As part of the conclusions, we argued that MACC results prove partially that the cap-and-trade system is a feasible option to apply in Mexico. In addition, a cap-and-trade mechanism should show a strong carbon price signal felt by end users and therefore motivates the application of circular economy principles, which are related to the introduction of innovations to enable the closing of current materials and energy loops along the supply production chain.


Cap-and-trade Marginal abatement cost curves Circular economy Climate change Climate policy 


  1. Aghion P, Hemous D, Veugelers R (2009) No green growth without innovation. Bruegel, BruselasGoogle Scholar
  2. Balderas Torres A (2012) Yes in my backyard: market based mechanisms for forest conservation and climate change mitigation in La Primavera, México, PhD thesis. University of Twente, Netherlands. Accessed 5 Feb 2014
  3. Betsill M, Hoffmann M (2011) The contours of “cap-and-trade”: the evolution of emission trading systems for greenhouse gases. Pol Res 28:83–106Google Scholar
  4. Bressers H, Huitema D (1999) Economic instruments for environmental, protection: can we trust the “magic carpet”? Int Polit Sci Rev 20:175–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bristow A, Wardman M, Zanni A, Chintakayala P (2010) Public acceptability of personal carbon trading and carbon tax. Ecol Econ 69:1824–1837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burtraw D, Kopp R, Morgenstern R (2010) Feasibility assessment of a carbon cap-and-trade system for Mexico. RFF report, Resources for the futureGoogle Scholar
  7. Centro Mario Molina, McKinsey Co (2008) Low carbon growth. A potential path for Mexico. Centro Mario Molina para Estudios Estratégicos de Energía y Medio Ambiente, Mexico CityGoogle Scholar
  8. Chesney M, Gheyssens J, Taschini L (2013) Environmental finance and investments. Springer-Verlag, ZurichCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CICC (2009) Programa Especial de Cambio Climático. (DOF - 28 de agosto de 2009)Google Scholar
  10. European Comission (2010) Global sectoral study: final report. Accessed 18 Feb 2014
  11. European Commission (2013) The EU Emission trading system: factsheet. Bruselas: European Commission. Publication OfficeGoogle Scholar
  12. Frankhauser S, Hepburn C, Park, J (2011) Combining multiple climate policy instruments: how not to do it. Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy No. 48Google Scholar
  13. Hargrave T (2000) An upstream/downstream hybrid approach to greenhouse gas emissions trading. Centre for Clean Air Policy, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  14. IEA (2013) CO2 emissions from fuel combustion. International Energy Agency Press, ParisGoogle Scholar
  15. IETA (2013) The world’s carbon markets: a case study guide to emissions trading in Mexico. International Emission Trading Association. Accessed 27 Nov 2013
  16. INECC (2013) Inventario Nacional de Emisiones 2010. SEMARNAT. Accessed 12 Feb 2014
  17. Kesicki F (2011) Marginal abatement cost curves for policy making – expert-based vs. model-derived curves. UCL Energy Institute, University College London, London, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  18. Kesicki F, Strachan N (2011) Marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves: confronting theory and practise. Environ Sci Pol 14:1195–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kleper G (2011) The future of the European emission trading system and the clean development mechanism in a post-Kyoto world. Energy Econ 33:687–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lascoumes P, Le Gales P (2007) Introduction: understanding public policy through its instruments – from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance 20:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ley General de Cambio Climático (2012) Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. Accessed 20 Apr 2013
  22. Morris JF (2009) Combining a renewable portfolio standard with a cap-and-trade policy: a general equilibrium analysis (Master thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States. Accessed 10 Mar 2014
  23. Niederberger AA, Shiroff S, Raahauge L (2013) Implications of carbon markets for implementing circular economy models. Eur J Bus Manag 5:187–199Google Scholar
  24. Presidencia de la República (2013) Iniciativa de Decreto por el que se reforman, adicionan y derogan diversas disposiciones de la Ley del Impuesto al Valor Agregado, de la Ley del Impuesto Especial sobre Producción y Servicios y del Código Fiscal de la Federación. Gobierno Federal, Mexico CityGoogle Scholar
  25. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (2013) Estrategia Nacional de Cambio Climático. Visión 10-20-40. Gobierno Federal, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  26. Simmons B, Elkins Z (2004) The globalization of liberalization: policy diffusion in the international political economy. Am Polit Sci Rev 98(01):171–189Google Scholar
  27. Tietenberg T (2003) The tradable permits approach to protecting the commons: lessons for climate change. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. USAID (2013) Updated analysis on Mexico’s GHG baseline, marginal abatement cost curve and project portfolio. Accessed 23 Feb 2014
  29. Wagner G (2013) Carbon cap and trade. In: Shogren JF (ed) Encyclopedia of energy, natural resource, and environmental economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  30. Xiangsheng D, Jingjing X, Zenglong Y (2013) Policy design and implementation issues of regulating. Intl J Environl Sci Dev 4(3):321–326Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • José-Luis Cruz-Pastrana
    • 1
  • María-Laura Franco-García
    • 2
  1. 1.Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores MonterreyCd López MateosMexico
  2. 2.University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations