IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ses/arsjes/2012-ii-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking the Swiss Emissions Trading System with the EU ETS: Economic Effects of Regulatory Design Alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Vöhringer

Abstract

The Swiss government intends to link the Swiss Emissions Trading System to the EU ETS after 2012. Employing GENESwIS, a dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the Swiss economy, we investigate the macroeconomic and sectoral effects of a post-2012 Swiss ETS with linking to the EU ETS. It is the first such CGE analysis for Switzerland with disaggregated sectors according to magnitude of CO2 emissions from installations, which allows distinguishing ETS installations from non-ETS installations in the same sector. The reference scenario represents the announced post-2012 Swiss climate policy without ETS, implying a GHG emissions target for 2020 of -20% with respect to 1990. In the ETS policy scenarios, regulatory issues include participation thresholds and the share of auctioned permits. We show that the Swiss ETS reduction targets are not ambitious when declining baseline emissions are assumed. Thus, most ETS installations profit from an ETS, while non-ETS sectors have to reduce more emissions (and pay a higher CO2 tax). In the context of the simulated Swiss ETS scenarios, we find that distributional consequences of regulatory choices are far more important than efficiency considerations.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Vöhringer, 2012. "Linking the Swiss Emissions Trading System with the EU ETS: Economic Effects of Regulatory Design Alternatives," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 148(II), pages 167-196, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ses:arsjes:2012-ii-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sjes.ch/papers/2012-II-4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Hafstead, Marc A.C. & Dworsky, Michael, 2010. "Impacts of alternative emissions allowance allocation methods under a federal cap-and-trade program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 161-181, November.
    2. Jensen, Jesper & Rasmussen, Tobias N., 2000. "Allocation of CO2 Emissions Permits: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Policy Instruments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 111-136, September.
    3. Edwards, T. Huw. & Hutton, John P., 2001. "Allocation of carbon permits within a country: a general equilibrium analysis of the United Kingdom," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 371-386, July.
    4. Capros, Pantelis & Mantzos, Leonidas & Parousos, Leonidas & Tasios, Nikolaos & Klaassen, Ger & Van Ierland, Tom, 2011. "Analysis of the EU policy package on climate change and renewables," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1476-1485, March.
    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. Bin Ye & Jingjing Jiang & Lixin Miao & Ji Li & Yang Peng, 2015. "Innovative Carbon Allowance Allocation Policy for the Shenzhen Emission Trading Scheme in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-23, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael, 2011. "Emissions targets and the real business cycle: Intensity targets versus caps or taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 352-366.
    4. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    5. Hübler, Michael & Voigt, Sebastian & Löschel, Andreas, 2014. "Designing an emissions trading scheme for China—An up-to-date climate policy assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-72.
    6. Knut Einar Rosendahl & Halvor Briseid Storrøsten, 2011. "Output-based allocation and investment in clean technologies," Discussion Papers 644, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    7. Gavard, Claire & Voigt, Sebastian, 2017. "EU competitiveness and the 2030 framework: A industry perpective. Final report referring to EASME/COSME/2014/031," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 181908.
    8. Hübler, Michael & Löschel, Andreas, 2013. "The EU Decarbonisation Roadmap 2050—What way to walk?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 190-207.
    9. Sun, Tao & Zhang, Hongwei & Wang, Yuan, 2013. "The application of information entropy in basin level water waste permits allocation in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 50-54.
    10. Sun, Tao & Zhang, Hongwei & Wang, Yuan & Meng, Xiangming & Wang, Chenwan, 2010. "The application of environmental Gini coefficient (EGC) in allocating wastewater discharge permit: The case study of watershed total mass control in Tianjin, China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(9), pages 601-608.
    11. Dardati, Evangelina & Saygili, Meryem, 2020. "Aggregate impacts of cap-and-trade programs with heterogeneous firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    12. Katrin Rehdanz & Richard S.J. Tol, 2004. "On Multi-Period Allocation Of Tradable Emission Permits," Working Papers FNU-43, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Apr 2004.
    13. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    14. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    15. Francis Bossier & Danielle Devogelaer & Dominique Gusbin & Florence Thiery, 2011. "Working Paper 09-11 - Impact of the EU Climate-Energy Package on the Belgian energy system and economy - Update 2010 Study commissioned by the Belgian federal authority," Working Papers 1109, Federal Planning Bureau, Belgium.
    16. Nicolosi, Marco, 2011. "The impact of RES-E policy setting on integration effects - A detailed analysis of capacity expansion and dispatch results," MPRA Paper 31835, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    18. Travis Warziniack & David Finnoff & Jonathan Bossenbroek & Jason Shogren & David Lodge, 2011. "Stepping Stones for Biological Invasion: A Bioeconomic Model of Transferable Risk," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 605-627, December.
    19. Matar, Walid & Murphy, Frederic & Pierru, Axel & Rioux, Bertrand, 2015. "Lowering Saudi Arabia's fuel consumption and energy system costs without increasing end consumer prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 558-569.
    20. Zhu, Bangzhu & Jiang, Mingxing & He, Kaijian & Chevallier, Julien & Xie, Rui, 2018. "Allocating CO2 allowances to emitters in China: A multi-objective decision approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 441-451.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emissions trading system; climate policy; energy policy; Switzerland; computable general equilibrium model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models

    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:ses:arsjes:2012-ii-4. 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: Kurt Schmidheiny (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sgvssea.html .

    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.