IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ajlecn/v13y2022i2p173-193n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of Emissions Trading Systems: Cost Efficiency and Environmental Jurisdictional Authority Overlap

Author

Listed:
  • Ji Philip Inyeob

    (Department of Economics, Dongguk University Seoul, Jung-gu, South Korea)

  • Mulenga Richard

    (Department of Economics, Dongguk University Seoul, Jung-gu, South Korea)

  • Bhandari Seema Bogati

    (Dongguk Business School, Dongguk University Seoul, Jung-gu, South Korea)

Abstract

This study conducts a comparative analysis of selected emissions trading systems (ETS) by examining them in terms of cost efficiency and jurisdictional authority overlap. Findings show that, the selected allowances markets generally exhibit cost inefficiency as manifested by price volatility. It is also found that ETS environmental jurisdictional overlaps are largely caused by the overly centralized environmental policy regulation. Literature review indicates that practical approaches to mitigating price volatility and jurisdictional authority problems include, among others, linking of ETS jurisdictions as exemplified by the linked California-Quebec ETS, integration of allowances markets, switching from emission-based taxation to consumption-based taxation, and development of the derivatives markets. Streamlining and delegation of environmental laws and judicial reviews are some of the efforts that could help mitigate jurisdictional overlap disputes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ji Philip Inyeob & Mulenga Richard & Bhandari Seema Bogati, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Emissions Trading Systems: Cost Efficiency and Environmental Jurisdictional Authority Overlap," Asian Journal of Law and Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 173-193, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ajlecn:v:13:y:2022:i:2:p:173-193:n:7
    DOI: 10.1515/ajle-2022-0058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ajle-2022-0058
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ajle-2022-0058?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ajlecn:v:13:y:2022:i:2:p:173-193:n:7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.