Abstract
Regulators around the world are currently considering national emissions trading schemes (ETS) as cost-effective instruments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the process, they are confronted with numerous design issues. The coverage of installations in an ETS is one such issue. While “blanket coverage” that includes all industrial emitters of greenhouse gases in an economy has some intuitive appeal, and seems equitable, it does not take into full account all the costs related to the extent of coverage. This paper shows that an alternative approach of “partial coverage” based on benefit–cost analysis can achieve the same emission reduction outcome at lower social cost. The approach is based on maximizing the benefits from inclusion of installations in an ETS at the same time as taking all relevant transaction costs into account. A broad definition of transaction costs is used, which covers the regulatory costs to the government as well as regulatory costs imposed on covered installations. We find that particularly for relatively modest emissions reduction targets the cost savings of a “partial coverage” compared to “blanket coverage” are significant.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. (ACESA). H.R. 2454. Title VII—Global warming pollution reduction program.
Betz R., Rogge K., Schleich J. (2006) EU Emission Trading: An early analysis of national allocation plans for 2008–2012. Climate Policy 6(4): 361–394
Betz R. A. (2003) Emissionshandel zur bekämpfung des treibhauseffektes: Der einfluss der ausgestaltung auf die transaktionskosten am beispiel Deutschland. IRB Verlag, Stuttgart
Böhringer, C., Hoffman, T., Lange, A., Loschel, A. & Moslener, U. (2004). Assessing Emissions Allocation in Europe: An interactive simulation approach. Discussion Paper No. 04-40. Centre for European Economic Research, Mannheim.
Brechet T., Jouvet P-A. (2009) Why environmental management may yield no-regret pollution abatement options. Ecological Economics 68(6): 1770–1777
Cason T., Gangadharan L. (2003) Transaction costs in tradable permit markets: An experimental study of pollution market design. Journal for Regulatory Economics 23(2): 145–165
CEC. (2003). Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 Establishing a Scheme for Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Trading Within the Community and Amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. Official Journal of the European Union, 275, 32–46.
CEC. (2009). Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to Improve and Extend the Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Trading Scheme, Brussels.
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board. (2004). Project Design Document of Project 0287; ACC Blended cement projects at New Wadi Plant, Tikaria Cement Plant, Chanda Cement Works, Kymore Cement Works, Lakheri Cement Works and Chaibasa Cement Works. Accessed March 1, 2009, from http://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/LDYI1UEV2BIP6PRFTSJF0Z5DJSN79F.
Coase R. H. (1960) The problem of social cost. The Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1–44
Commons, J. R. (1934/1990). Institutional economics. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers (reprint).
Commonwealth of Australia. (2008). Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme: Australia’s low pollution future, White Paper. Accessed December 15, 2008, from http://www.climatechange.gov.au/whitepaper/index.html.
Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill, Canberra.
Convery F., Redmond L. (2007) Market and price developments in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 1(1): 88–111
Crocker, T. D. (1966). The structuring of atmospheric pollution control systems. In H. Wolozin (Ed.), The economics of air pollution, a symposium (pp. 61–86).
Dales J. H. (1968) Pollution, property & prices. University Press, Toronto
De Beer, J., Phylipsen, D., & Bates, J. (2001). Economic evaluation of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emission reductions in industry in the EU. In Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change. Brussels: European Commission.
Dwyer, J. P. (1992). California’s tradeable Emissions Policy and its application to the control of greenhouse gases. In OECD, Climate change. Designing a tradeable permit system (pp. 41–77).
Ewringmann, D., Bergmann, H., Bertenrath, R., Betz, R., Dünnebeil, F., Lambrecht, U., Liebig, L., Rogge, K., & Schade, W. (2005). Emissionshandel im Verkehr—Ansätze für einen möglichen Up-Stream-Handel im Verkehr, Forschungsbericht 202 14 198, UBA-FB 000825. Accessed December 15, 2007, from http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/2969.pdf.
Foster V., Hahn R. W. (1995) Designing more efficient markets: Lesson from Los Angeles smog control. Journal of Law and Economics 38: 19–45
Graus, W., & Voogt, M. (2007). Small installations within the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. Report under the project “Review of EU Emissions Trading Scheme”, ECS04079. Report commissioned by the European Commission Directorate General for Environment, Brussels.
Hahn R. W. (1984) Market power and transferable property rights. Quarterly Journal of Economics 99(4): 753–765
Hargrave T. (2000) An upstream/downstream hybrid approach to greenhouse gas emissions trading. Centre for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC
Hendriks, C., de Jager, D., de Beer, J., van Brummelen, M., Blok, K., & Kerssemeeckers, M. (2001). Economic evaluation of emission reduction of greenhouse gases in the energy supply sector in the EU. In Economic evaluation of sectoral emission reduction objectives for climate change. European Commission.
Hyman R. C., Reilly J. M., Babiker M. H., De Masin A., Jacoby H. D. (2002) Modeling non-CO2 greenhouse gas abatement. Environmental Modeling and Assessment 8: 175–186
Jaraite, J., Convery, F., & Di Maria, C. (2009). Transaction costs of Firms in the EU ETS, Working Paper. Accessed February 15, 2009, from http://www.aprec.net/documents/09-02-17_transaction_costs_of_firms_in_the_eu_ets.pdf.
Joskow P., Marron D. (1992) What does a Negawatt really cost? Evidence from utility conservation programs. Energy Journal 13(4): 41–74
McCann L., Colby B., Easter W., Kasterine A., Kuperan K. (2005) Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies. Ecological Economics 52: 527–542
Montero J.-P. (1997) Marketable pollution permits with uncertainty and transaction costs. Resource and Energy Economics 20(1): 27–50
Montgomery D. W. (1972) Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs. Journal of Economic Theory 5: 395–418
New Zealand Government. (2008). Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading) Amendment Act 2008, Public Act2008 No 85, Date of assent 25 September 2008. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2008/0085/latest/whole.html#DLM1131412.
Schleich J., Betz R. A. (2004) EU Emissions trading and transaction costs for small and medium sized companies. INTERECONOMICS Review of European Economic Policy 39(3): 121–123
Stavins R. N. (1995) Transaction costs and tradable allowances. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29: 133–148
Stern, N. (2006). Stern review: The economics of climate change. Accessed January 1, 2009, from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm.
Stigler G.J. (1972) The law and economics of public policy: A plea to the scholars. The Journal of Legal Studies 1: 1–12
Tietenberg T. H. (2006) Emissions trading: Principle and practice. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Betz, R., Sanderson, T. & Ancev, T. In or out: efficient inclusion of installations in an emissions trading scheme?. J Regul Econ 37, 162–179 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-009-9109-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-009-9109-0