IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/actuec/v70y1994i2p139-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Permis d’émission négociables et réglementation dans des marchés de concurrence imparfaite

Author

Listed:
  • Sartzetakis, Eftichios S.

    (Département d’économique, Carleton University)

Abstract

This paper develops a model of a homogeneous Cournot duopoly subject to environmental regulation. Two systems of regulation are examined. A source-specific system (command and control) and a market-based system (tradeable emission permits). It is shown that tradeable emission permits are more efficient than command and control when the permit market is competitive but that it is less efficient when one of the duopolists is a price setter in the permit market. Under Cournot conjectures, the price setter in the permits market seeks to raise its rival's costs in order to increase its market share. Under a tradeable emission permits system, the government can either initially auction the permits or distribute them free of charge (grandfathering). It is shown that with a competitive permit market, both types of initial allocation are efficient. However, with a price setter in the permit market, auctioning is more efficient than grandfathering. Cette étude présente un duopole de Cournot soumis à une réglementation environnementale. Deux types d’approche sont étudiés : l’approche « ordre et contrôle » et les permis d’émission négociables. L’analyse démontre qu’un système de permis d’émission négociables est plus efficace que l’approche « ordre et contrôle » quand le marché des permis est concurrentiel, mais qu’il est moins efficace quand une des entreprises est capable de fixer le prix dans le marché des permis. Dans un duopole à la Cournot, l’entreprise capable de fixer le prix des permis cherche à faire augmenter les coûts de son concurrent afin d’augmenter sa part du marché des produits. Dans un système de permis d’émission négociables, l’État peut initialement vendre les permis aux enchères ou les distribuer sans frais (grandfathering). Il est démontré que lorsque le marché des permis est concurrentiel, les deux systèmes d’allocation initiale des permis sont efficaces, tandis que lorsqu’il y a pouvoir de marché, la vente aux enchères est plus efficace que la distribution gratuite des permis.

Suggested Citation

  • Sartzetakis, Eftichios S., 1994. "Permis d’émission négociables et réglementation dans des marchés de concurrence imparfaite," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 70(2), pages 139-158, juin.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:v:70:y:1994:i:2:p:139-158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/602138ar
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farber, Stephen C & Martin, Robert E, 1986. "Market Structure and Pollution Control under Imperfect Surveillance," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 147-160, December.
    2. Burrows, Paul, 1981. "Controlling the monopolistic polluter: Nihilism or eclecticism?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 372-380, December.
    3. Malueg, David A., 1990. "Welfare consequences of emission credit trading programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 66-77, January.
    4. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1987. "Cost-Raising Strategies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 19-34, September.
    5. Lyon, Randolph M., 1986. "Equilibrium properties of auctions and alternative procedures for allocating transferable permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 129-152, June.
    6. Robert W. Hahn, 1984. "Market Power and Transferable Property Rights," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 99(4), pages 753-765.
    7. O'Neil, William & David, Martin & Moore, Christina & Joeres, Erhard, 1983. "Transferable discharge permits and economic efficiency: The fox river," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 346-355, December.
    8. Misiolek, Walter S. & Elder, Harold W., 1989. "Exclusionary manipulation of markets for pollution rights," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 156-166, March.
    9. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1983. "Raising Rivals' Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 267-271, May.
    10. 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.
    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. Julien Bueb & Sonia Schwartz, 2011. "Strategic manipulation of a pollution permit market and international trade," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 313-331, June.
    2. Olivier Godard, 1998. "Les permis d'émission négociables et la lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique," Post-Print hal-00622857, HAL.
    3. Bueb, Julien & Schwartz, Sonia, 2009. "Permis d’émission négociables et commerce international dans des marchés de concurrence imparfaite," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 85(3), pages 303-318, septembre.

    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. Newell, Richard G & Stavins, Robert N, 2003. "Cost Heterogeneity and the Potential Savings from Market-Based Policies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 43-59, January.
    2. Dormady, Noah C., 2014. "Carbon auctions, energy markets & market power: An experimental analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 468-482.
    3. Dormady, Noah C., 2013. "Market power in cap-and-trade auctions: A Monte Carlo approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 788-797.
    4. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    5. Stavins, Robert & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Abatement-Cost Heterogeneity and Anticipated Savings from Market-Based Environmental Policies," Working Paper Series rwp00-006, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. R. Devlin & R. Grafton, 1994. "Tradeable permits, missing markets, and technology," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 171-186, April.
    7. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    8. Pascale PHELINAS & Sonia SCHWARTZ, 2017. "Regulating transgenic soybean production in Argentina," Working Papers 201721, CERDI.
    9. 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.
    10. Dickson, Alex & MacKenzie, Ian A., 2018. "Strategic trade in pollution permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 94-113.
    11. Harrie A.A. Verbon & Cees A. Withagen, 2004. "Tradable emission permits in a federal system," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/83, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    12. 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.
    13. Anthony Heyes, 2009. "Is environmental regulation bad for competition? A survey," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-28, August.
    14. Luca Taschini & Marc Chesney & Mei Wang, 2014. "Experimental comparison between markets on dynamic permit trading and investment in irreversible abatement with and without non-regulated companies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 23-50, August.
    15. Andreas Löschel & Zhong Zhang, 2002. "The economic and environmental implications of the US repudiation of the kyoto protocol and the subsequent deals in Bonn and Marrakech," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 138(4), pages 711-746, December.
    16. Jamie Brown-Kruse & Steven R Elliot & Rob Godby, 1995. "Strategic Manipulation of Pollution Permit Markets: An Experimental Approach," Department of Economics Working Papers 1995-03, McMaster University.
    17. Tang, Maogang & Li, Zhen & Hu, Fengxia & Wu, Baijun & Zhang, Ruihan, 2021. "Market failure, tradable discharge permit, and pollution reduction: Evidence from industrial firms in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Arthur Caplan, 2008. "Incremental and Average Control Costs in a Model of Water Quality Trading with Discrete Abatement Units," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(3), pages 419-435, November.
    19. Carolos Chavez & John Stanlund, 2003. "Enforcing Transferable Permit Systems in the Presence of Market Power," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(1), pages 65-78, May.
    20. Eftichios Sartzetakis, 2004. "On the Efficiency of Competitive Markets for Emission Permits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(1), pages 1-19, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ris:actuec:v:70:y:1994:i:2:p:139-158. 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: Benoit Dostie The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Benoit Dostie to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/scseeea.html .

    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.