Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v41y2020i6p215-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Permit Allocation on Cap-and-trade System Performance under Market Power

Author

Listed:
  • Mei Wang
  • Peng Zhou
Abstract
The presence of market power usually has negative impacts on the cost-effectiveness of the carbon market. As market power-induced efficiency loss depends on permit allocation, the choice of permit allocation methods is likely to affect the cost-effectiveness of the carbon market. This paper examines theoretically how the choice of emission permit allocation method affects the cost-effectiveness of an emissions trading system when market power exists. We find that, under grandfathering and benchmarking, the carbon market would be more efficient if the permits initially allocated to the dominant firm were closer to its CO2 emissions. Under auctioning, the dominant firm tends to lower the CO2 price, which may result in efficiency loss. By combining the modelling results of efficiency loss due to market power and the fairness in terms of CO2 cost pass-through, we finally provide some policy recommendations on how to choose a CO2 emission permit allocation method for different industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Mei Wang & Peng Zhou, 2020. "Impact of Permit Allocation on Cap-and-trade System Performance under Market Power," The Energy Journal, , vol. 41(6), pages 215-232, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:41:y:2020:i:6:p:215-232
    DOI: 10.5547/01956574.41.6.mwan
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/01956574.41.6.mwan
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/01956574.41.6.mwan?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cramton, Peter & Kerr, Suzi, 2002. "Tradeable carbon permit auctions: How and why to auction not grandfather," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 333-345, March.
    2. Philippe Quirion, 2009. "Historic versus output-based allocation of GHG tradable allowances: a comparison," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 575-592, November.
    3. Guy Meunier, 2011. "Emission Permit Trading Between Imperfectly Competitive Product Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 347-364, November.
    4. Francisco J. André & Carmen Arguedas, 2018. "Technology Adoption in Emission Trading Programs with Market Power," The Energy Journal, , vol. 39(1_suppl), pages 145-174, June.
    5. Roy Jones & Haim Mendelson, 2011. "Information Goods vs. Industrial Goods: Cost Structure and Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 164-176, January.
    6. Lawrence H. Goulder & Richard D. Morgenstern & Clayton Munnings & Jeremy Schreifels, 2017. "Chinas National Carbon Dioxide Emission Trading System: An Introduction," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    7. Andreas Lange, 2012. "On the Endogeneity of Market Power in Emissions Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 573-583, August.
    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. Wang, M. & Zhou, P., 2017. "Does emission permit allocation affect CO2 cost pass-through? A theoretical analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 140-146.
    2. Liu, Beibei & He, Pan & Zhang, Bing & Bi, Jun, 2012. "Impacts of alternative allowance allocation methods under a cap-and-trade program in power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 405-415.
    3. Anouliès, Lisa, 2017. "Heterogeneous firms and the environment: a cap-and-trade program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 84-101.
    4. Yun-Fei Yao & Qiao-Mei Liang, 2016. "Approaches to carbon allowance allocation in China: a computable general equilibrium analysis," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(1), pages 333-351, November.
    5. Geng, Wenxin & Fan, Ying, 2022. "An imperfectly competitive permit market under a rate-based scheme," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    6. Wang, M. & Zhou, P., 2022. "A two-step auction-refund allocation rule of CO2 emission permits," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    7. Frédéric Branger & Misato Sato, 2017. "Solving the clinker dilemma with hybrid output-based allocation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 483-501, February.
    8. Philippe Quirion, 2010. "Competitiveness and Leakage," Chapters, in: Emilio Cerdá Tena & Xavier Labandeira (ed.), Climate Change Policies, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Hongpeng Guo & Zhihao Lv & Junyi Hua & Hongxu Yuan & Qingyu Yu, 2021. "Design of Combined Auction Model for Emission Rights of International Forestry Carbon Sequestration and Other Pollutants Based on SMRA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    10. Julie Anne Cronin & Don Fullerton & Steven Sexton, 2019. "Vertical and Horizontal Redistributions from a Carbon Tax and Rebate," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(S1), pages 169-208.
    11. Martin Zapf & Hermann Pengg & Christian Weindl, 2019. "How to Comply with the Paris Agreement Temperature Goal: Global Carbon Pricing According to Carbon Budgets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-20, August.
    12. James Fan & Christopher Griffin, 2014. "Optimal Digital Product Maintenance with a Continuous Revenue Stream," Papers 1412.8624, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    13. Yates, Andrew J. & Doyle, Martin W. & Rigby, J.R. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2013. "Market power, private information, and the optimal scale of pollution permit markets with application to North Carolina's Neuse River," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 256-276.
    14. Wang, Ning & Shang, Kai & Duan, Yan & Qin, Dandan, 2023. "Carbon quota allocation modeling framework in the automotive industry based on repeated game theory: A case study of ten Chinese automotive enterprises," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    15. Bode, Sven, 2006. "Multi-period emissions trading in the electricity sector--winners and losers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 680-691, April.
    16. Adhikari, Arnab & Sharma, Megha & Basu, Sumanta & Jha, Ashish Kumar, 2022. "Uniform or spatially differentiated? Pricing Strategies for Information Goods under simultaneous and sequential decision-making in multi-market context," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    17. Tang, Ling & Wu, Jiaqian & Yu, Lean & Bao, Qin, 2017. "Carbon allowance auction design of China's emissions trading scheme: A multi-agent-based approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 30-40.
    18. Fabio Antoniou & Efthymia Kyriakopoulou, 2019. "On the Strategic Effect of International Permits Trading on Local Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1299-1329, November.
    19. Gesine Bökenkamp & Wan-Jung Chou & Olav Hohmeyer & Wouter Nijs & Alistair Hunt & Anil Markandya, 2010. "Policy Instruments," Chapters, in: Anil Markandya & Andrea Bigano & Roberto Porchia (ed.), The Social Cost of Electricity, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:sae:enejou:v:41:y:2020:i:6:p:215-232. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.