IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hin/jnddns/1432052.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Perspective of Evolution for Carbon Emissions Trading Market: The Dilemma between Market Scale and Government Regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Qi Zhu

Abstract

Which means are more effective for reducing carbon emission? Our paper argues the effect of the government regulation and the market trading on the carbon emission. Based on our model, we obtain three conclusions as follows. First, government strengthened regulation can encourage firms to participate in the trading market for carbon emission. Second, there is the negative relation of supervision cost to trading price. Third, there is an alternative relationship between the scale economy level of the supervisory authority and that of the carbon emissions market. Meanwhile, our numerical simulations also confirm our results for our model analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Qi Zhu, 2017. "A Perspective of Evolution for Carbon Emissions Trading Market: The Dilemma between Market Scale and Government Regulation," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-7, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:hin:jnddns:1432052
    DOI: 10.1155/2017/1432052
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/DDNS/2017/1432052.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/DDNS/2017/1432052.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2017/1432052?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. Hahn, Robert W & Noll, Roger G, 1990. "Enviromental Markets in the Year 2000," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 351-367, December.
    2. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    3. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    4. Don Fullerton & Garth Heutel, 2010. "The General Equilibrium Incidence of Environmental Mandates," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 64-89, August.
    5. Helfand, Gloria E, 1991. "Standards versus Standards: The Effects of Different Pollution Restrictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 622-634, June.
    6. Peter M. Clarkson & Yue Li & Matthew Pinnuck & Gordon D. Richardson, 2015. "The Valuation Relevance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the European Union Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 551-580, September.
    7. Fullerton, Don & Heutel, Garth, 2007. "The general equilibrium incidence of environmental taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 571-591, April.
    8. Downing, Paul B. & White, Lawrence J., 1986. "Innovation in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 18-29, March.
    9. Jung, Chulho & Krutilla, Kerry & Boyd, Roy, 1996. "Incentives for Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology at the Industry Level: An Evaluation of Policy Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-111, January.
    10. Malueg, David A., 1989. "Emission credit trading and the incentive to adopt new pollution abatement technology," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 52-57, January.
    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. Yuan Yuan & Feng Cai & Lingling Yang, 2020. "Renewable Energy Investment under Carbon Emission Regulations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Jieli Hu & Tieli Wang, 2023. "Strategies of Participants in the Carbon Trading Market—An Analysis Based on the Evolutionary Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.

    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. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    2. Alejandro Caparrós & Richard E. Just & David Zilberman, 2015. "Dynamic Relative Standards versus Emission Taxes in a Putty-Clay Model," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(2), pages 277-308.
    3. Angelo Antoci & Simone Borghesi & Gianluca Iannucci & Paolo Russu, 2020. "Emission permits, innovation and sanction in an evolutionary game," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 37(2), pages 525-546, July.
    4. Verhoef, Erik T. & Nijkamp, Peter, 1999. "Second-best energy policies for heterogeneous firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 111-134, April.
    5. Erik Verhoef & Peter Nijkamp, 1997. "The Adoption of Energy Efficiency Enhancing Technologies," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 97-077/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Verhoef, Erik T. & Nijkamp, Peter, 2003. "The adoption of energy-efficiency enhancing technologies.: Market performance and policy strategies in case of heterogeneous firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 839-871, July.
    7. Rabah Amir & Adriana Gama & Katarzyna Werner, 2018. "On Environmental Regulation of Oligopoly Markets: Emission versus Performance Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 147-167, May.
    8. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    10. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rose, Adam, 2008. "Equity and Justice in Global Warming Policy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(2), pages 135-176, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Eva Camacho-Cuena & Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2012. "Investment Incentives Under Emission Trading: An Experimental Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 229-249, October.
    13. Dagmar Nelissen & Till Requate, 2007. "Pollution-reducing and resource-saving technological progress," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 5-44.
    14. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    15. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    16. Nentjes, Andries & de Vries, Frans P. & Wiersma, Doede, 2007. "Technology-forcing through environmental regulation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 903-916, December.
    17. Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 23-44, July.
    18. Lehmann, Paul, 2008. "Using a policy mix for pollution control: A review of economic literature," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2008, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    19. David Grover, 2012. "Do market-based instruments really induce more environmental R&D? A test using US panel data," GRI Working Papers 98, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    20. Bento, Antonio M. & Garg, Teevrat & Kaffine, Daniel, 2018. "Emissions reductions or green booms? General equilibrium effects of a renewable portfolio standard," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 78-100.

    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:hin:jnddns:1432052. 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: Mohamed Abdelhakeem (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.hindawi.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.