Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps?
AbstractEnvironmental policies often set âârelative'' or ââintensity'' emission caps, i.e. emission limits proportional to the polluting firm's output. One of the arguments put forth in favour of relative caps is based on the uncertainty on business-as-usual output: if the firm's production level is higher than expected, so will be business-as-usual emissions, hence reaching a given level of emissions will be more costly than expected.As a consequence, it is argued, a higher emission level should be allowed if the production level is moreimportant than expected. We assess this argument with a stochastic analytical model featuring two randomvariables: the business-as-usual emission level, proportional to output, and the slope of the marginalabatement cost curve.We compare the relative cap to an absolute cap and to a price instrument, in terms ofwelfare impact. It turns out that in most plausible cases, either a price instrument or an absolute cap yields ahigher expected welfare than a relative cap. Quantitatively, the difference in expected welfare is typically very small between the absolute and the relative cap but may be significant between the relative cap and the price instrument.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Resource and Energy Economics.
Volume (Year): 27 (2005)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505569
Other versions of this item:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Michael Hoel & Larry Karp, 1999.
"Taxes and Quotas for a Stock Pollutant with Multiplicative Uncertainty,"
1999.15, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Hoel, Michael & Karp, Larry, 2001. "Taxes and quotas for a stock pollutant with multiplicative uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 91-114, October.
- Hoel, Michael & Karp, Larry, 2000. "Taxes and Quotas for a Stock Pollutant with Multiplicative Uncertainty," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9v86p5s7, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
- Roberts, Marc J. & Spence, Michael, 1976. "Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 193-208.
- Kolstad, Charles D., 2005. "The simple analytics of greenhouse gas emission intensity reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(17), pages 2231-2236, November.
- Catherine Boemare & Philippe Quirion, 2002.
"Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe: lessons from economic literature and international experiences,"
- Boemare, Catherine & Quirion, Philippe, 2002. "Implementing greenhouse gas trading in Europe: lessons from economic literature and international experiences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 213-230, December.
- Pizer, William A., 1999. "The optimal choice of climate change policy in the presence of uncertainty," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 255-287, August.
- Weitzman, Martin L, 1974.
"Prices vs. Quantities,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 477-91, October.
- Udo Ebert, 1998. "Relative standards: A positive and normative analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 17-38, February.
- Stavins, Robert N., 1996. "Correlated Uncertainty and Policy Instrument Choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 218-232, March.
- Fischer, Carolyn, 2001. "Rebating Environmental Policy Revenues: Output-Based Allocations and Tradable Performance Standards," Discussion Papers dp-01-22, Resources For the Future.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.