IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v11y1998i1p19-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Efficiency in Bilateral Emission Trading

Author

Listed:
  • Dallas Burtraw
  • Keneth Harrison
  • Paul Turner

Abstract

When environmental damages from emissions are spatially nonuniform, permit trading has been modeled most often as a “pollution offset program” in which emission permits are traded between agents, subject to constraints on ambient air quality. To date the institution envisioned to implement such a program involves trading on a bilateral and sequential basis. However, simulation studies indicate that the sequence of trades may alter the outcome and undermine the cost savings from a pollution offset program. This paper identifies a design for the trading institution that tends to overcome this phenomenon and improve the efficiency of equilibria obtained in a simulation model. We model a bilateral trading process for the reduction of sulfur dioxide emissions with a stochastic description of the sequence of trades within groups of nations in Europe. When trading takes place between disaggregated, stylistic representations of economic enterprises, rather than between national governments, a significantly greater portion of potential savings is achieved. In fact, under most sets of assumptions, approximate first order stochastic dominance is achieved wherein the more decentralized the trading agents, the greater the expected savings from a trading program. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Suggested Citation

  • Dallas Burtraw & Keneth Harrison & Paul Turner, 1998. "Improving Efficiency in Bilateral Emission Trading," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 19-33, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:1:p:19-33
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008236224091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1008236224091
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008236224091?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    2. Atkinson, Scott E. & Lewis, Donald H., 1974. "A cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative air quality control strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 237-250, November.
    3. Ledyard, John O. & Szakaly-Moore, Kristin, 1994. "Designing organizations for trading pollution rights," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 167-196, October.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," Working Paper Series rwp04-051, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Krupnick, Alan J. & Oates, Wallace E. & Van De Verg, Eric, 1983. "On marketable air-pollution permits: The case for a system of pollution offsets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 233-247, September.
    6. Hahn, Robert W, 1989. "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor's Orders," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 95-114, Spring.
    7. Brown,Stephen J. & Sibley,David Sumner, 1986. "The Theory of Public Utility Pricing," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314008, September.
    8. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    9. Bohi, Douglas R. & Burtraw, Dallas, 1992. "Utility investment behavior and the emission trading market," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1-2), pages 129-153, April.
    10. Hahn, Robert W., 1986. "Trade-offs in designing markets with multiple objectives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, March.
    11. Berg,Sanford V. & Tschirhart,John, 1989. "Natural Monopoly Regulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521338936, September.
    12. Atkinson, Scott & Tietenberg, Tom, 1991. "Market failure in incentive-based regulation: The case of emissions trading," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 17-31, July.
    13. Spulber, Daniel F., 1985. "Effluent regulation and long-run optimality," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 103-116, June.
    14. Karl Hausker, 1992. "The politics and economics of auction design in the market for sulfur dioxide pollution," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 553-572.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen L. & Heintzelman, Martin, 2000. "Electricity Restructuring: Consequences and Opportunities for the Environment," Discussion Papers 10854, Resources for the Future.
    2. S. Kruitwagen & H. Folmer & E. Hendrix & L. Hordijk & E. van Ierland, 2000. "Trading Sulphur Emissions in Europe: `Guided Bilateral Trade'," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(4), pages 423-441, August.
    3. Burtraw, Dallas, 2000. "Innovation Under the Tradable Sulfur Dioxide Emission Permits Program in the U.S. Electricity Sector," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-38, Resources for the Future.
    4. Zhuo Hu & Dong Huang & Congjun Rao & Xiaolin Xu, 2016. "Innovative allocation mechanism design of carbon emission permits in China under the background of a low-carbon economy," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(2), pages 419-434, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    2. Y. Ermoliev & M. Michalevich & A. Nentjes, 2000. "Markets for Tradeable Emission and Ambient Permits: A Dynamic Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 15(1), pages 39-56, January.
    3. Hung, Ming-Feng & Shaw, Daigee, 2005. "A trading-ratio system for trading water pollution discharge permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 83-102, January.
    4. Boisvert, Richard N. & Poe, Gregory L. & Sado, Yukako, 2007. "Selected Economic Aspects of Water Quality Trading: A Primer and Interpretive Literature Review," EB Series 121835, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    5. Fernando Rodríguez, 1999. "Joint Implementation under the Second Sulfur Protocol: Analysis and Simulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 143-168, March.
    6. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Ger Klaassen & Finn Førsund & Markus Amann, 1994. "Emission trading in Europe with an exchange rate," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(4), pages 305-330, August.
    8. Scott Lee Johnson & David M. Pekelney, 1996. "Economic Assessment of the Regional Clean Air Incentives Market: A New Emissions Trading Program for Los Angeles," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(3), pages 277-297.
    9. Ben-David, Shaul & Brookshire, David S. & Burness, Stuart & McKee, Michael & Schmidt, Christian, 1999. "Heterogeneity, Irreversible Production Choices, and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 176-194, September.
    10. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    11. Lori Bennear & Robert Stavins, 2007. "Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 111-129, May.
    12. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    13. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    14. Solomon, Barry D., 1999. "New directions in emissions trading: the potential contribution of new institutional economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 371-387, September.
    15. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    16. John, A. & Pecchenino, R. & Schimmelpfennig, D. & Schreft, S., 1995. "Short-lived agents and the long-lived environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 127-141, September.
    17. Stavins, Robert, 2003. "Market-Based Environmental Policies: What Can We Learn from U.S. Experience and Related Research?," Working Paper Series rwp03-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    18. James Shortle & Richard D. Horan, 2013. "Policy Instruments for Water Quality Protection," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 111-138, June.
    19. Coggins, Jay S. & Swinton, John R., 1996. "The Price of Pollution: A Dual Approach to Valuing SO2Allowances," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-72, January.
    20. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2015. "The political economy of pollution markets: Historical lessons for modern energy and climate planners," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 943-953.

    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:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:1:p:19-33. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.