IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/recofi/ecofi_0987-3368_2002_num_66_2_3744.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Le changement climatique planétaire : Le commerce de permis d’émission au service de la protection d’un bien collectif

Author

Listed:
  • Olivier Godard

Abstract

[fre] Le Protocole de Kyoto mettrait-il en péril la compétitivité industrielle des pays ? C’est à cette question qu’est consacré le présent article. L’auteur analyse, tout d’abord, le statut du climat comme bien collectif planétaire et la structuration de l’accord de Kyoto. Puis, il caractérise l’impact différentiel de l’introduction de mécanismes d’échange au sein d’un régime international fondé sur des restrictions quantitatives en fonction du degré d’harmonisation des politiques nationales. Enfin, il s’intéresse à l’impact possible du déploiement du Mécanisme de développement propre créé à Kyoto entre pays industriels et PED. C’est par l’échange de permis d’émission entre les deux zones qu’on pourra trouver la voie pour surmonter à moyen terme le problème posé par l’absence de participation des PED au système des engagements quantifiés, sans affecter leurs objectifs de développement. . Classification JEL : K32, O10, Q01, Q25 [eng] Planet climate change -The trade in emission permits in order to protect a collective asset . Will the Kyoto protocol jeopardise the industrial competitivity of countries ? This article is dedicated to looking at this question. First of all the author analyses the status of the climate as a collective global asset and the structure of the Kyoto agreement. Then, he characterizes the differential impacts of the introduction of exchange mechanisms within an international regime that is based on quantitative restrictions commensurate with the degree of harmonisation in national policies. Finally, he is interested in the possible impact of the deployment of the development Mechanism created in Kyoto between the industrialised nations and the PED. It is through the exchange of emission permits between these two zones that it is possible to identify the way to overcome the problem caused by the lack of participation of the PED in the system of quantified undertakings, without affecting their development objectives. . JEL classifications : K32, O10, Q01, Q25

Suggested Citation

  • Olivier Godard, 2002. "Le changement climatique planétaire : Le commerce de permis d’émission au service de la protection d’un bien collectif," Revue d'Économie Financière, Programme National Persée, vol. 66(2), pages 75-100.
    • Handle: RePEc:prs:recofi:ecofi_0987-3368_2002_num_66_2_3744
    DOI: 10.3406/ecofi.2002.3744
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecofi.2002.3744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecofi.2002.3744
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecofi_0987-3368_2002_num_66_2_3744
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecofi.2002.3744?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. Olivier Godard, 1997. "Les enjeux des négociations sur le climat," Post-Print halshs-00624074, HAL.
    2. C�dric Philibert & Jonathan Pershing, 2001. "Considering the options: climate targets for all countries," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 211-227, June.
    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. Thomas Jobert & Fatih Karanfil & Anna Tykhonenko, 2012. "Trade and Environment: Further Empirical Evidence from Heterogeneous Panels Using Aggregate Data," GREDEG Working Papers 2012-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Wenhui Tian & Pascal da Costa & Jean-Claude Bocquet, 2015. "Inequalities of Sectors CO 2 emissions in China, USA and France, 2010-2050," Working Papers hal-01219769, HAL.
    3. Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2006. "Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0605, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    4. Max Meulemann, 2017. "An Empirical Assessment Of Components Of Climate Architectures," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 1-36, November.
    5. Ebohon, Obas John & Ikeme, Anthony Jekwu, 2006. "Decomposition analysis of CO2 emission intensity between oil-producing and non-oil-producing sub-Saharan African countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3599-3611, December.
    6. Jinhua Zhao, 2022. "Aggregate emission intensity targets: Applications to the Paris Agreement," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(4), pages 1875-1897, October.
    7. Kuntsi-Reunanen, E., 2007. "A comparison of Latin American energy-related CO2 emissions from 1970 to 2001," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 586-596, January.
    8. Piero Morseletto & Frank Biermann & Philipp Pattberg, 2017. "Governing by targets: reductio ad unum and evolution of the two-degree climate target," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 655-676, October.
    9. Ernesto Aguayo-T鬬ez & Jos頍art󹑺-Navarro, 2013. "Internal and international migration in Mexico: 1995--2000," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(13), pages 1647-1661, May.
    10. E. Kuntsi‐Reunanen & J. Luukkanen, 2006. "Greenhouse gas emission reductions in the post‐Kyoto period: Emission intensity changes required under the ‘contraction and convergence’ approach," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(4), pages 272-279, November.
    11. Groenenberg, Heleen & Blok, Kornelis & van der Sluijs, Jeroen, 2005. "Projection of energy-intensive material production for bottom-up scenario building," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 75-99, April.
    12. Katrin Rehdanz & Richard S.J. Tol, 2005. "A No Cap But Trade Proposal For Greenhous Gas Emission Reduction Targets For Brazil, China And India," Working Papers FNU-68, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Jul 2005.
    13. Vazhayil, Joy P. & Balasubramanian, R., 2010. "Copenhagen commitments and implications: A comparative analysis of India and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7442-7450, November.
    14. Frank Jotzo & John Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 259-284, October.
    15. Jan-Tjeerd Boom & Bouwe Dijkstra, 2009. "Permit Trading and Credit Trading: A Comparison of Cap-Based and Rate-Based Emissions Trading Under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(1), pages 107-136, September.
    16. Thomas Jobert & Fatih Karanfil & Anna Tykhonenko, 2014. "Estimating country-specific environmental Kuznets curves from panel data: a Bayesian shrinkage approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(13), pages 1449-1464, May.
    17. Derek Wang, 2017. "A Comparative Study of Firm-Level Climate Change Mitigation Targets in the European Union and the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, March.
    18. Clò, Stefano & Battles, Susan & Zoppoli, Pietro, 2013. "Policy options to improve the effectiveness of the EU emissions trading system: A multi-criteria analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 477-490.
    19. Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2005. "Optimal intensity targets for emissions trading under uncertainty (now replaced by EEN0605)," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0504, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    20. Konidari, Popi & Mavrakis, Dimitrios, 2007. "A multi-criteria evaluation method for climate change mitigation policy instruments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6235-6257, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
    • O10 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - General
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water

    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:prs:recofi:ecofi_0987-3368_2002_num_66_2_3744. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecofi .

    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.