IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331324.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the role of CDM and JI for the European climate strategy and the European Emissions Trading Scheme

Author

Listed:
  • Klepper, Gernot
  • Peterson, Sonja

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to assess the likely allocation effects of the current climate protection strategy as it is laid out in the National Allocation Plans (NAPs) for the European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). The multi-regional, multi-sectoral CGE-model DART is used to simulate the effects of the current policies in the year 2012 when the Kyoto targets need to be met. Different scenarios are simulated in order to highlight the effects of the grandfathering of permits to energy-intensive installations, the use of the project-based mechanisms (CDM and JI), and the restriction imposed by the supplementarity criterion.

Suggested Citation

  • Klepper, Gernot & Peterson, Sonja, 2005. "Assessing the role of CDM and JI for the European climate strategy and the European Emissions Trading Scheme," Conference papers 331324, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331324/files/1814.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Abman,Ryan Michael & Lundberg,Clark Christopher & Ruta,Michele, 2021. "The Effectiveness of Environmental Provisions in Regional Trade Agreements," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9601, The World Bank.
    2. Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank & Schymura, Michael, 2015. "Peeling the onion: Analyzing aggregate, national and sectoral energy intensity in the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 63-75.
    3. Nicole A. MATHYS & Jaime DE MELO, 2010. "Trade and Climate Change: The Challenges Ahead," Working Papers P14, FERDI.
    4. J. Ernesto Lopez-Cordova & Christopher M. Meissner, 2005. "The Globalization of Trade and Democracy, 1870-2000," NBER Working Papers 11117, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Yuping Deng & Helian Xu, 2015. "International Direct Investment and Transboundary Pollution: An Empirical Analysis of Complex Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-25, April.
    6. LaPlue, Lawrence D., 2019. "The environmental effects of trade within and across sectors," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 118-139.
    7. Sinha, Avik & Shahbaz, Muhammad, 2018. "Estimation of Environmental Kuznets Curve for CO2 emission: Role of renewable energy generation in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 703-711.
    8. Daniel Fiorino, 2011. "Explaining national environmental performance: approaches, evidence, and implications," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(4), pages 367-389, November.
    9. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    10. Cui, Jingbo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2012. "Are exporters more environmentally friendly than non-exporters? Theory and evidence," ISU General Staff Papers 201210040700001076, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Yiping Sun & Xiangyi Li & Tengyuan Zhang & Jiawei Fu, 2022. "Does Trade Policy Uncertainty Exacerbate Environmental Pollution?—Evidence from Chinese Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-21, February.
    12. Grether, Jean-Marie & Mathys, Nicole A. & de Melo, Jaime, 2007. "Trade, Technique and Composition Effects: What is Behind the Fall in World-Wide SO2 Emissions 1990-2000?," Economic Theory and Applications Working Papers 7448, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Sethi, Pradeepta & Chakrabarti, Debkumar & Bhattacharjee, Sankalpa, 2020. "Globalization, financial development and economic growth: Perils on the environmental sustainability of an emerging economy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 520-535.
    14. Tang, John P., 2015. "Pollution havens and the trade in toxic chemicals: Evidence from U.S. trade flows," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 150-160.
    15. Yoori Kim & Soohyeon Kim & Jungho Baek & Eunnyeong Heo, 2019. "The linkages between democracy and the environment: Evidence from developed and developing countries," Energy & Environment, , vol. 30(5), pages 821-832, August.
    16. Christoph Böhringer & Thomas F. Rutherford & David G. Tarr & Natalia Turdyeva, 2017. "Market Structure and the Environmental Implications of Trade Liberalization: Russia’s Accession to the World Trade Organization," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Trade Policies for Development and Transition, chapter 20, pages 459-485, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Ashim Kumar Kar, 2023. "Pollution and income: Looking into the environmental Kuznets curve in south Asian countries," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 43(4), pages 1680-1697.
    18. Aoife Hanley & Finn Ole Semrau, 2022. "Stepping up to the mark? Firms’ export activity and environmental innovation in 14 European countries," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(5), pages 672-700, May.
    19. Frankel, Jeffrey, 2008. "Global Environmental Policy and Global Trade Policy," Working Paper Series rwp08-058, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    20. Qiang Li & Lian An & Jing Xu & Mina Baliamoune-Lutz, 2018. "Corruption costs lives: evidence from a cross-country study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(1), pages 153-165, January.

    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:ags:pugtwp:331324. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.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.