The appropriateness and importance of market-based environmental governance systems vary according to different cases. Although so-called ‘market trading’ regimes can be useful in some circumstances, a false belief in the inevitability of their cost-effectiveness compared with so-called ‘command and control’ systems has allowed policy distortions to occur. So-called ‘command and control’ policies are being underemphasised, despite the fact that they may achieve reductions in carbon emissions that are cheaper than those likely to be achieved through emissions (or ‘certificate’) trading regimes. I address theoretical arguments which I then place in context with analysis of some features of the British Renewables Obligation and the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Volume (Year): 26 (2008) Issue (Month): 5 (October) Pages: 938-953 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF